At the time I was thinking something more along the lines of:

public interface XSModel extends SchemaComponent {}
public interface XSObject extends SchemaComponent {}

deriving some kind of common interface which both XSModel and XSObject
extend.

Michael Glavassevich
XML Parser Development
IBM Toronto Lab
E-mail: [email protected]
E-mail: [email protected]

Ishan Jayawardena <[email protected]> wrote on 07/27/2010 02:22:08 AM:

> 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]

Reply via email to