This appears to be a different problem. The element <operationSelector.jmsDefault/> has type sca:OperationSelectType, which is abstract (this was also true in the prior version of the binding.jms schema). I do not believe that an element is allowed to have an abstract type. The same problem exists for <wireFormat.jmsDefault/>.
Bryan Aupperle, Ph.D. STSM, WebSphere Enterprise Platform Software Solution Architect WW Center of Excellence for Enterprise Systems & Banking Center of Excellence Application Integration Architect Research Triangle Park, NC +1 919-254-7508 (T/L 444-7508) Internet Address: [email protected] ant elder <[email protected]> wrote on 08/16/2010 02:54:11 PM: > From: > > ant elder <[email protected]> > > To: > > [email protected] > > Date: > > 08/16/2010 02:55 PM > > Subject: > > Re: Fix to SCA spec issue ASSEMBLY-223 > > On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 6:00 PM, Simon Laws <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 5:49 PM, Bryan Aupperle <[email protected]> wrote: > >> sca-core-1.1-cd05.xsd does not contain the fix for Assembly-223. You need > >> sca-core-1.1-cd05-rev1.xsd (and the other schema committed at the same > >> time). > >> > >> Bryan Aupperle, Ph.D. > >> STSM, WebSphere Enterprise Platform Software Solution Architect > >> WW Center of Excellence for Enterprise Systems & Banking Center of > >> Excellence Application Integration Architect > >> > >> Research Triangle Park, NC > >> +1 919-254-7508 (T/L 444-7508) > >> Internet Address: [email protected] > >> > >> Simon Laws <[email protected]> wrote on 08/16/2010 12:18:37 PM: > >> > >>> From: > >>> > >>> Simon Laws <[email protected]> > >>> > >>> To: > >>> > >>> [email protected], [email protected] > >>> > >>> Date: > >>> > >>> 08/16/2010 12:19 PM > >>> > >>> Subject: > >>> > >>> Re: Fix to SCA spec issue ASSEMBLY-223 > >>> > >>> On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 3:11 PM, ant elder <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> > On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 10:52 AM, Simon Laws > >>> <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> >> On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 10:06 AM, ant elder <[email protected]> > >>> >> wrote: > >>> >>> On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 10:56 AM, Simon Laws > >>> <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> >>>> On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 5:24 PM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino > >>> >>>> <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> >>>>> Are there any plans to apply the fix described in SCA spec > >>> ASSEMBLY-223 [1] > >>> >>>>> to the Tuscany SCA XML schemas? > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> A diff between the OASIS CD05 schema [2] and the Tuscany 2.x > >>> trunk schema > >>> >>>>> [3] shows that Tuscany has applied a different fix (or > >>> workaround?) to the > >>> >>>>> issue reported in ASSEMBLY-223. > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> I think it would be good to apply the official fix from OASIS. > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> [1] http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/ASSEMBLY-223 > >>> >>>>> [2] http://docs.oasis-open.org/opencsa/sca-assembly/sca- > >>> core-1.1-cd05.xsd > >>> >>>>> [3] > >>> >>>>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tuscany/sca-java-2.x/trunk/ > >>> modules/assembly-xsd/src/main/resources/sca-core-1.1-cd05.xsd > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> Thanks > >>> >>>>> -- > >>> >>>>> Jean-Sebastien > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> Hi Sebastien > >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> Yes, we need to move to the latest set of OASIS schema wholesale. > >>> >>>> It's > >>> >>>> a little difficult to tell precisely what version that is. Either > >>> >>>> CD05-rev1 or CD06 as they are having revision number discussions. > >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> This is going to cause some pain for a few days as we sort out the > >>> >>>> new > >>> >>>> features. We have been carrying a few Tuscany specific changes where > >>> >>>> we were getting ahead of the formal application of fixes tothe OASIS > >>> >>>> XSD so we do need to sort those out also. > >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> I don't know how hard it's going to be yet. We need to get the latest > >>> >>>> XSD and give them a go. Personally I'd like us to get the otests back > >>> >>>> to a level of stability before doing the refresh so that we're not > >>> >>>> fighting too many fronts at once. There maybe limits to this as I > >>> >>>> expect some of the new otests depend on the new schema. At the moment > >>> >>>> it feels like next week will be the time to do this. Anyoneelse have > >>> >>>> thoughts? > >>> >>>> > >>> >>> > >>> >>> Has anyone tried or would like to try this yet? I'm having some issues > >>> >>> with the jms binding schema that i wonder if might be fixed by > >>> >>> updating to the latest sca schemas, but your comment about it causing > >>> >>> pain for a few days puts me off trying it. > >>> >>> > >>> >>> ...ant > >>> >>> > >>> >> > >>> >> I think we've got back to the stage with the otests where we can give > >>> >> this a try. They're not all passing yet but we're down to a small > >>> >> enough number failing to allow us to assess the impact of the schema > >>> >> change. If no one else steps up I could give it a go locally in the > >>> >> next few days and report back here on the effect. > >>> >> > >>> > > >>> > I've just tried changing Tuscany to use the xsd at > >>> > http://docs.oasis-open.org/opencsa/sca-assembly/sca-core-1.1-cd05.xsd > >>> > but that gives the following: > >>> > > >>> > org.xml.sax.SAXParseException: cos-nonambig: > >>> > "http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/opencsa/sca/200912":implementation and > >>> > WC[##other:"http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/opencsa/sca/200912";] (or > >>> > elements from their substitution group) violate "Unique Particle > >>> > Attribution". During validation against this schema, ambiguity would > >>> > be created for those two particles. > >>> > > >>> > I've not been involved in ASSEMBLY-223 or these scheam updates so does > >>> > anyone else know whats going on or if there are other associated > >>> > changes needed other than just the sca-core-1.1-cd05.xsd one? > >>> > > >>> > ...ant > >>> > > >>> > >>> Hi Ant > >>> > >>> Looking at the different between the sca-core-1.1-cd05.xsd and the one > >>> we have it seems that we've gone in and removed some of the remaining > >>> xsd:any elements. If these really need to be removed then we need to > >>> have a conversation with OASIS. > >>> > >>> Which test were you running when you see the failure? > >>> > >>> Simon > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Apache Tuscany committer: tuscany.apache.org > >>> Co-author of a book about Tuscany and SCA: tuscanyinaction.com > >> > > > > Ah, thanks Bryan. Can't speak for Ant but I was certainly looking at > > the wrong file. > > > > Yep thanks i hadn't seen the *-rev1 versions of the files either. > > But i have now tried them now and still have problems, this time back > at the same error that the tuscany mod'ed version of the schema's was > giving: > > XMLSchema validation error occured in: Test_BJM_4008.composite ,line = > 26, column = 17, Message = cvc-type.2: The type definition cannot be > abstract for element operationSelector.jmsDefault > > Thats from a .composite file that has: > > <binding.jms uri="jms:jndi:TEST_BJM_4008_Queue"> > <operationSelector.jmsDefault/> > </binding.jms> > > which should be using just the oasis schema's > sca-core-1.1-cd05-rev1.xsd and sca-binding-jms-1.1-cd04-rev1.xsd. Can > any one see what could be going wrong (though there are quite a lot of > oasis files to update so it is quite possible i've just missed one or > not updated something correctly). > > ..ant
