JAXB 2.0 should do this, though I was unable to get JAXB to work with
the Axis2 1.2RC1 WSDL2Java. Has anyone been successful in using JAXB
with Axis2?
JiBX will also handle this. Unlike JAXB 2.0, with JiBX it's not the
default behavior. In the JiBX binding you need to set flexible="true" on
any <mapping> or <structure> element where you want to allow unknown
elements.
In general it's not a good approach to do this kind of schema extension
(especially for web services, where the schema definition should be part
of the service contract). If you want to allow for extensions, use an
xs:any element as a wildcard that allows for other elements to be added
in the future. Otherwise you're not actually following the schema, which
defeats the whole purpose of having one in the first place.
- Dennis
Dennis M. Sosnoski
SOA and Web Services in Java
Training and Consulting
http://www.sosnoski.com - http://www.sosnoski.co.nz
Seattle, WA +1-425-939-0576 - Wellington, NZ +64-4-298-6117
Amila Suriarachchi wrote:
As I understood you are looking for an databinding framwork which does
not do any validation. try jaxb.
On 4/16/07, *Josh* < [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>>
wrote:
Amila,
If I configure a databinding approach to work with the following XML:
<person>
<firstName>John</firstName>
<lastName>Doe</lastName>
</person>
Which databinding approaches will not break if I pass in the
following XML:
<person>
<firstName>John</firstName>
<lastName>Doe</lastName>
<age>25</age>
<sex>M</sex>
</person>
While most client applications may not want to interpret the new
information, I want to make sure that I can recommend a binding
approach that does not cause a ripple effect when new items are
added to the schema. Does this clarify what I am looking for?
-Joshua
On 4/16/07, *Amila Suriarachchi* <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
On 4/14/07, *Josh* <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
All,
I am looking to determine which client side data binding
choices (castor, jibx, jaxb etc) allow backwards
compatible schema changes (eg addition of a new field)
without throwing an exception.
What you exactly mean by backword compatible schema?
e g. if you add a new element to a complex type with
minOccurs 0 then this should work properly with the requests
you got earlier as well. But in this case it the way you write
schema and it has nothing to do with the databinding frame
work as far as it correctly interpret the schema.
I am hoping to recommend some solutions to my clients that
would allow me to make backward compatible schema changes
without causing a ripple effect. Has anyone come across
this information?
Regards,
Joshua
--
Amila Suriarachchi,
WSO2 Inc.
--
Amila Suriarachchi,
WSO2 Inc.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
