co.uk> cc:
Subject: Re: complexType extending a
simpleType
02/21/2002 03:59
ll as being a String.
But ah well, beans with getValue()/setValue() it is.
--Glen
> -Original Message-
> From: Richard Sitze [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 6:29 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: complexType extending a simpleType
>
Ah, well so much for that idea then. :)
> -Original Message-
> From: Melissa Turner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 5:22 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: complexType extending a simpleType
>
>
> On Thursday, February
EMAIL PROTECTED]To:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
co.uk> cc:
Subject: Re: complexType
extending a simpleType
02/21/2002 03:25
PM
Please respo
; Subject: Re:
> complexType extending a simpleType
> 02/21/2002 03:25
> PM
> Please respond to
> axis-dev
>
>
>
>
>
> FWIW, I ran int
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> co.uk> cc:
>
cc:
Subject: Re: complexType extending a
simpleType
02/21/
Tom and I discussed this yesterday, and I like this approach a little better:
Have the custom type directly extend the simple type which is being extended. So in
the example below, you'd have:
public class InternationalPrice extends String implements TypeWithAttributes {
public static Str
FWIW, I ran into this doing the Group D doc/literal interop tests for
pocketSOAP, and took exactly the same approach.
Cheers
Simon
On Thu, 21 Feb 2002 15:12:03 -0600, in soap you wrote:
>According to XML Schema Primer 0 Chapter 2.5.1, a complexType can be
>derived from a simple type to add attr
