However I'd like to keep the configuration-id and especially the service-id atts. Actually my first use case was to decorate BuilderFactory. Apart of this both give well ids for schemas and not every <schema> has an explicit id.
Thanks, Chris
On Sat, 6 Mar 2004 08:52:56 -0500, Howard M. Lewis Ship <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm a little nervous about the use of configuration-id or service-id ... why not schema-id.
Recently, <schema> was, effectively, promoted to first-class status (a schema's id is qualified with
the module id and may be referenced from other modules).
-- Howard M. Lewis Ship Independent J2EE / Open-Source Java Consultant Creator, Tapestry: Java Web Components http://howardlewisship.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Christian Essl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 05, 2004 10:35 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [HiveMind] nested schemas
I think I have solved my problem with a element content definition based on another schema. (I include the patch).
To do that I had to modify the core. There is now an extra tag under element:
<content parent-method="" configuration-id="" or service-id=""/>
If one configuration or service is provided the schema is looked up there and content of the element is parsed according to the schema. The list is than set on the parent.
If no configuration-id or service-id is provided than the child Elements are contained in the list. If the element has no childs an empty list is passed in. It also supports recursive definitions.
To see how I imagine its use see the test-case.
Maybe someone could comment on that.
Thanks, Chris
-- Christian Essl
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
