Hi again, Also, given your clairifications, if you can let me know which parts of the configuration clean up you've been working on that'd be great. I would be happy to start working on things from either your previous list or this list later this week, I just don't want to conflict with what you've already done. Thanks, - Dan
On 5/29/07, Dan Diephouse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Andrea, Sorry that I missed this message the first time around, Bo's recent message alerted me to it. Comments are inline... On 5/22/07, Andrea Smyth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi, > > Before we release 2.0 Final (hopefully with cfg files etc. fixed so > that we can enable Spring schema validation:)) is an opportunity to > modify and bring consistency into namespaces and public URIs for the CXF > > schemas. > Taking two schemas as an example, we have > > Location: > > trunk/rt/frontend/jaxws/src/main/resources/org/apache/cxf/jaxws/spring/jaxws.xsd > Target namespace: http://cxf.apache.org/jaxws > Public URI (as per spring.schemas): > http://cxf.apache.org/schema/jaxws.xsd > > or > > Location: trunk/tools/common/src/main/resources/schemas/wsdl/jms.xsd > Target namespace: http://cxf.apache.org/transports/jms > Public URI (as per spring.schemas): http://cxf.apache.org/transport/jms.xsd > > > Right now, the schemas are not available at their public URI, but long > term they should be IMO, and therefore I'd like to see that > a) they use at least a common prefix, e.g. schema, after > http://cxf.apache.org/ to avoid clashes in d). The first example uses > "schema", the second uses no prefix at all, and yet others use "schemas" > instead of schema, see the concatenation of all spring.schemas files in > CXF below. Are you suggesting that if a schema namespace is http://cxf.apache.org/2.0/schemas/jms that should also be a publicly available namespace? Or are you just suggesting we standardize on a "schema" or "transport" instead of "schemas" and "transports"? b) possibly include a version number or a date in the prefix, i.e. > schemas/2.0 or schemas/2007/06 (personally I find version numbers a bit > friendlier than dates; the version number need not be the same for all > schemas in a release, it would just happen to be so for the 2.0release). I would think version numbers would be more appropriate as dates won't matter so much to users as versions will. c) all cfg files consistently use these public URIs in their > schemalocation attribute d) ideally we can make them available at their public URI > Right now this would have to be under http://incubator.apache.org/cxf/ > but I assume that after graduation this will change to > http://cxf.apache.org. I we want to avoid a needless change upon > graduation, we could use http://cxf.apache.org in the public URI > already, and tell people that for now that can find any (public, > documented) CXF schema by substituting cxf.apache.org with > incubator.apache/cxf. Ugh, that is a sticky one. I would prefer our URIs start with http://cxf.apache.org/. Why don't I check in with infrastructure (or our mentors) and see if we can get a redirect from http://cxf.apache.org/schemas/foo.xsd to our incubator site for future compatability. As far as namespaces are concerned, we can use the same, a different or > no prefix - but whatever it is it should be used consistently. Using the > same prefix as in the URI is probably the simplest solution. > > A version number or date in the namespace/public URI may look ugly, but > could prove very useful, especially as there is no such thing as "the" > big CXF schema, but lots of small schemas instead. And depending on the > evolution of their associated modules, they are more or less subject to > change in the future. > > What do people think? So I think all these changes are probably good things. Are you also proposing that we move to one single namespace for everything? Or would we still have a JAX-WS namespace, a WS-A namespace, etc?? Also, what about keeping the current namespace registrations around in the spring.* files so its easy for users to migrate to new versions. We can add a simple line to the AbstractBeanDefinitionParser to check the namespaces ( i.e. does it start with http://cxf.apache.org/2.0/) and if not, emit a deprecation warning. - Dan -- Dan Diephouse Envoi Solutions http://envoisolutions.com | http://netzooid.com/blog
-- Dan Diephouse Envoi Solutions http://envoisolutions.com | http://netzooid.com/blog
