xml-xmlbeans-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "David Bau" <david....@bea.com>
Subject Re: Current start-with-java annotations
Date Sat, 22 Nov 2003 10:36:00 GMT
OK, everybody's favorite topic, organizing annoation names.  Now with JSR
175, lots of folks are going to be getting into the business...  Here we go.

Comments on

Some questions:

I've inferred the javadoc syntax from your table in the examples I put at
the bottom of the wiki page do I have it right?  Do the examples otherwise
look like what you intended?

On attribute naming... Would we ever be allowed to specify both
@xsdgen:element and @xsdgen:attribute at the same time?  Probably not,
right?  To eliminate a degree of freedom which would only be an error, it
seems like these two could be merged into the same annotation (in which case
is-attribute would be a boolean setting).  There are no "best practices" for
175 yet, but reducing illusory degrees of freedom seems like a kind of
principle.  Agree/disagree?

On the opposite side, complexType.rootElement feels like a weird name, since
schema elements are not types (and this is a source of common source of
confusion we should work to reduce), and a generated element definition is
independent of its complex type definition.  Should we consider splitting
complexType and globalElement into separate annotations?  [Also, would we
ever have an annotation called simpleType, and if so, would it ever be
allowed at the same time as complexType?  If not perhaps it should just be

Also, you have the ability to specify the rootElement localname, but not the
targetNamespace, which is 1/2 of the degrees of freedom available for the
global element definition name.  Would element targetNamespace be added as a
knob in the future?

For my edification, how should targetNamespace be chosen by default?  Is it
based on the package name, or is it a global setting on the command-line of
the java->schema compiler?

Finally, a couple details - you have element.exclude as a "present/absent"
kind of switch.  I think 175 is going to give us defaults, but when a
property is present, you'll have to specify a value, so seems like it should
be a boolean with a default of "false"?  Similarly, you've listed nillable
as an NCName rather than a boolean - seems like a typo?


- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   xmlbeans-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: xmlbeans-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Apache XMLBeans Project -- URL: http://xml.apache.org/xmlbeans/

View raw message