Thanks, I've tried that with the jsonp binding and its all working well. There is still the issue of unknown elements in the tuscany namespace, so adding <tuscany:binding.foo /> to a composite still does not cause any schema validation errors, which it probably should.
...ant On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 10:50 PM, Raymond Feng<[email protected]> wrote: > I'm adding the support to aggregate the XSDs by TNS and resolve xsd:import > without schemaLocation too. It will enable the schema extensions. I'll check > in the fix when the build is successful. > > Thanks, > Raymond > > -------------------------------------------------- > From: "ant elder" <[email protected]> > Sent: Sunday, August 09, 2009 11:17 AM > To: <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: Adding xsd's for scheme validation of extensions > >> Ok cool that sounds good. But there's still something else going on >> with the tuscany schema's that i've not tracked down as there's no >> validation errors even without any jsonp schema at all, and also if i >> add <tuscany:binding.foo /> to a testcase composite the testcase still >> runs fine its only when using the sca namespace like <sca:binding.foo >> /> that the testcase fails. >> >> ...ant >> >> On Sun, Aug 9, 2009 at 6:46 PM, Raymond Feng<[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> The xsd is picked up by Tuscany and it is passed to the >>> SchemaFactory.newSchema() method. Now we have two XSDs, one from >>> assembly-xsd (tuscany-sca-1.1.xsd which includes other xsds) and the >>> other >>> is binding-jsonp.xsd. >>> >>> SchemaFactory.newSchema is keeping a cache based on target namespaces. >>> When >>> the binding-jsonp.xsd is loaded, there is already entries from >>> tuscany-sca-1.1.xsd that has the same namespace (tuscany namespace) and >>> binding-jsonp.xsd is ignored. >>> >>> We can fix the problem as follows: >>> >>> For all the Source passed to newSchema(), we read the targetNamespace >>> first >>> and group the XSDs by tns. If we see multiple files have the same >>> namespace, >>> then we generate a façade XSD that includes the original XSDs. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Raymond >>> -------------------------------------------------- >>> From: "ant elder" <[email protected]> >>> Sent: Sunday, August 09, 2009 3:59 AM >>> To: <[email protected]> >>> Subject: Re: Adding xsd's for scheme validation of extensions >>> >>>> On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 5:33 PM, Raymond Feng<[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> You can plug it in using >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> META-INF/services/org.apache.tuscany.sca.contribution.processor.ValidationSchema. >>>>> Each text line in the file can point to an XSD using its resource name. >>>>> We >>>>> might need to tweak the following method so that xsd:import/xsd:include >>>>> across modules can work. I can help to fix it if you see problems. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> org.apache.tuscany.sca.contribution.processor.DefaultValidatingXMLInputFactory.resolveResource(String, >>>>> String, String, String, String) >>>>> >>>> >>>> Ok i've started trying this using the JSONP binding to try it out in >>>> r802514. There must be something else going on as it doesn't seem to >>>> have made much difference, the testcase in binding-jsonp-runtime runs >>>> without producing any scheme validation error message both before and >>>> after that change when the .composite is as is or changed to have >>>> extra unused attributes added to the binding.jsonp element. >>>> >>>> ...ant >>> >>> >
