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 20:26:34 GMT
It might be worth noting that the original code was written at IBM a long
time ago and then contributed to the ASF :-) How it relates historically to
the Eclipse code I cannot say.


On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 11:35 AM, Tom Jordahl <tjordahl@adobe.com> wrote:

>  Ø  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.
>
>
>
> +1 – we use it in a few places to read/write Schema and it is very useful.
> Xerces does not do what we want.
>
>
>
> Tom Jordahl
>
>
>
> *From:* Benson Margulies [mailto:bimargulies@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, April 07, 2009 8:35 AM
> *To:* j-dev@xerces.apache.org
> *Cc:* Daniel Kulp; general@ws.apache.org; Lawrence Mandel
> *Subject:* Re: How many XML Schema libraries at ASF is too many XML Schema
> Libraries?
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 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