Benson Margulies <[email protected]> wrote on 04/07/2009 08:34:35 AM:
> FYI: Annotations aren't a good example. They are part of the > component model and do get preserved in Xerces. > Just out of perverse curiosity: an annotation on an attribute group: > disappears, or pushes down onto the resulting objects? Attribute groups, yes. References to attribute groups, no in XML Schema 1.0. In XML Schema 1.1 they get attached to the enclosing complex type definition / attribute group definition. In Xerces we may already be supporting the 1.1 behaviour in 1.0 mode so that we don't lose this information. > > A programmer working, say, with the CXF Aegis binding, can open a > > book on Xml Schema, and find an API that corresponds to the > > constructs he or she sees there. In the model you are describing, > > that person would need to become familiar with the underlying model. > > I'm not by any means describing this as a fatal flaw, just a consideration. > Different goals. Xerces' API represents the abstract model described > for PSVI and a consumer of that would expect this component view and > should already be familiar with it given that they are interested in > processing PSVI. > > In CXF, which I assume is not a bad model of Axis or even > Glassfish/Metro, we have a number of schema-ish things going on. > > We have to examine schema, since some of the JAX-? standards tell us > to condition behavior on schema facts. I'm sure we could mine the > PSVI-related information just as well; there sure aren't any > attribute groups at this level. > > We have to create schema based on code introspection and on > @nnotations. Here I have some worries: it would not surprise me if > somewhere in here was a requirement to create a W3C Xml Schema > element that is not part of the PSVI model. And, in any case, we'd > need an API to create. > > We support application programmers in specifying the schema for > custom Java/XML type mappings. They could probably handle PSVI. > > I don't know about you, but I'm left feeling that this conversation > has ended up revealing that the Xml Schema library isn't pointless. I never said it was, just that given the choices one of the existing ones may have already fit (e.g. Eclipse XSD). Thanks. Michael Glavassevich XML Parser Development IBM Toronto Lab E-mail: [email protected] E-mail: [email protected]
