Thanks for the suggestion, Mukul. I'l look into this and discuss with Sandy about this. To me, it looks like a better approach instead of modifying XSModel directly to implement XSObject. I think earlier, Michael had also suggested something similar to this. I'l let you know the details asap. Thanks.
On 7/27/10, Mukul Gandhi <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 8:57 PM, Ishan Jayawardena <[email protected]> > wrote: >> 1. the Schema Step. i.e. the SCP consisting of just '/'. [0] >> According to the spec, we have to return the schema component for >> '/', but since the current XSModel interface doesn't implement the >> XSObject interface, we have no means to return the xsmodel as a schema >> component. > > just curious. Can't we do something like: > > public interface SCDXsModel implements XSModel, XSObject { > > } > > i.e you don't use XSModel directly, but use a custom inheritance > design specific to SCD implementation. Therefore for example, you > would use SCDXsModel and not XSModel. > > I haven't looked deeply at the code-base in this regard. But you might > explore along the above lines, if it helps. > > -- > Regards, > Mukul Gandhi > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > -- Best Regards, Ishan Jayawardena. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
