ws-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Benson Margulies <bimargul...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: How many XML Schema libraries at ASF is too many XML Schema Libraries?
Date Tue, 07 Apr 2009 12:34:35 GMT
>
> FYI: Annotations aren't a good example. They are part of the component
> model and do get preserved in Xerces.
>
Just out of perverse curiosity: an annotation on an attribute group:
disappears, or pushes down onto the resulting objects?

>
>
> > A programmer working, say, with the CXF Aegis binding, can open a
> > book on Xml Schema, and find an API that corresponds to the
> > constructs he or she sees there. In the model you are describing,
> > that person would need to become familiar with the underlying model.
> > I'm not by any means describing this as a fatal flaw, just a
> consideration.
>
> Different goals. Xerces' API represents the abstract model described for
> PSVI and a consumer of that would expect this component view and should
> already be familiar with it given that they are interested in processing
> PSVI.
>

In CXF, which I assume is not a bad model of Axis or even Glassfish/Metro,
we have a number of schema-ish things going on.

We have to examine schema, since some of the JAX-? standards tell us to
condition behavior on schema facts. I'm sure we could mine the PSVI-related
information just as well; there sure aren't any attribute groups at this
level.

We have to create schema based on code introspection and on @nnotations.
Here I have some worries: it would not surprise me if somewhere in here was
a requirement to create a W3C Xml Schema element that is not part of the
PSVI model. And, in any case, we'd need an API to create.

We support application programmers in specifying the schema for custom
Java/XML type mappings. They could probably handle PSVI.

I don't know about you, but I'm left feeling that this conversation has
ended up revealing that the Xml Schema library isn't pointless.

Mime
View raw message