This problem was reported on axis-user, so it's not just my personal brain teaser. I don't expect we can catch all collisions, but by ignoring the file section altogether, we allow a lot of collisions that seem relatively easy to avoid.
Russell Butek [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tom Jordahl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 05/31/2002 04:47:02 PM Please respond to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: "'[EMAIL PROTECTED]'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc: Subject: RE: Utils.makePackageName has problems How about we just let this be an error (and report it) and let the user then map the namespaces to the right place themselves. I think prefer this approach. Are we going to be able to take all the collision cases in to account anyway? -- Tom Jordahl -----Original Message----- From: Russell Butek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 5:23 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Utils.makePackageName has problems Our automagic namespace->package algorithm has problems. If we have two types: - http://www.x.com/a/b/c:Type - http://www.x.com/x/y/z:Type These would both get mapped to the class: "com.x.www.Type". Bad news. The file info isn't being taken into account. But SHOULD it be? What about urn:i/am/a/jelly/donut urn:i/think/therefore/i/am These namespaces have the same problem, they will both map to package "i". Before I dive into this mess, is there anyone who thinks taking file info into account is a bad idea? Russell Butek [EMAIL PROTECTED]
