I've checked in a fix to append "1", "2" etc to anonymous type names that clash. In your example you will get types Overlapping and Overlapping1.
Cheers, On 01/05/07, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 5/1/07, Pete Robbins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Simon, I'll take a look at this. It may be fairly simple to mirror what > the > Tuscany Java implementation does. > > On 01/05/07, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On 4/30/07, Frank Budinsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > This is an open issue against the SDO specification. In Tuscany > SDO-Java > > > we automatically rename such duplicates: e.g., the second type would > be > > > named "Overlapping1". The next version of the spec needs to define a > > > "standard" way to handle this. > > > > > > Frank. > > > > > > "Pete Robbins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 04/30/2007 09:30:34 > > AM: > > > > > > > Is this a specification problem? I'm fairly sure the SDO spec states > > > that > > > > the Type name for an anonymous type is taken from the enclosing > > element. > > > In > > > > your example you have 2 types with the same name in the same > > namespace. > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > > > > > > > On 27/04/07, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > I talking to a user of the PHP SDO implementatio about a problem > > they > > > have > > > > > where SDO fails to parse an XML file with the error: > > > > > > > > > > SDO_DAS_XML_ParserException - unknown element errors... > > > > > > > > > > Looking at the code what seems to be going on is that annonymous > > types > > > are > > > > > being overwritten when the annonymous types have the same element > > > name, > > > > > for > > > > > example, If I have the schema: > > > > > > > > > > <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> > > > > > <schema xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema"; > > > > > targetNamespace="http://www.example.org/AnnonTypes"; > > > > > xmlns:tns="http://www.example.org/AnnonTypes"; > > > > > elementFormDefault="qualified"> > > > > > > > > > > <element name="Top"> > > > > > <complexType> > > > > > <sequence> > > > > > <element name="ElementA"> > > > > > <complexType> > > > > > <sequence> > > > > > <element name="Overlapping"> > > > > > <complexType> > > > > > <sequence> > > > > > <element name="ValueA" > type="string"/> > > > > > </sequence> > > > > > </complexType> > > > > > </element> > > > > > </sequence> > > > > > </complexType> > > > > > </element> > > > > > <element name="ElementB"> > > > > > <complexType> > > > > > <sequence> > > > > > <element name="Overlapping"> > > > > > <complexType> > > > > > <sequence> > > > > > <element name="ValueB" > type="string"/> > > > > > </sequence> > > > > > </complexType> > > > > > </element> > > > > > </sequence> > > > > > </complexType> > > > > > </element> > > > > > </sequence> > > > > > </complexType> > > > > > </element> > > > > > </schema> > > > > > > > > > > And the XML > > > > > > > > > > <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> > > > > > <tns:Top xmlns:tns="http://www.example.org/AnnonTypes"; > > > > > xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"; > > > > > xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.example.org/AnnonTypes > > > > > AnnonTypes.xsd "> > > > > > <tns:ElementA> > > > > > <tns:Overlapping> > > > > > <tns:ValueA>tns:ValueA</tns:ValueA> > > > > > </tns:Overlapping> > > > > > </tns:ElementA> > > > > > <tns:ElementB> > > > > > <tns:Overlapping> > > > > > <tns:ValueB>tns:ValueB</tns:ValueB> > > > > > </tns:Overlapping> > > > > > </tns:ElementB> > > > > > </tns:Top> > > > > > > > > > > I looked to see if this had been raised as a bug and It didn't > look > > > like > > > > > it > > > > > had. I'll go and do that but was just wondering if that was by > > design > > > for > > > > > some reason? To fix this we would have to construct a scoping > > > mechanism > > > > > for > > > > > annonymous types based on the context in which they appear. > > > > > > > > > > Regards > > > > > > > > > > Simon > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Pete > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > Ok thanks Frank/Pete. I checked the C++ spec and it does just say that > > the > > name of the annonymous type is the same as the name of the enclosing > > element > > declaration. So it's working as specified but we need to fix the > spec. I > > recorded this as TUSCANY-1238 lest we forget. > > > > Regards > > > > Simon > > > > > > -- > Pete > Ok, thanks Pete. Simon
-- Pete
