Actually, what I wanna do is the removal of this "cwmp" prefixes in
front of the subelements such as ParameterList and
ParameterValueStruct respectively.
This operation completely makes my xml unqualified which is desired mode.
<cwmp:SetParameterValues>
<cwmp:ParameterList soap:arrayType="ParameterValueStruct[7]">
<cwmp:ParameterValueStruct>
<Name>test1</Name>
<Value xsi:type="soapenc:boolean">true</Value>
</cwmp:ParameterValueStruct>
</cwmp:ParameterList>
</cwmp:SetParameterValues>
during last hour, I also tried to set Qname-prefix giving it an empty
string in the mapping xml but It did not work also.
<class name="....SetParameterValues" auto-complete="true">
<map-to xml="SetParameterValues" ns-prefix="cwmp" />
<field name="_parameterList" type="...ParameterList"
getmethod="getParameterList">
<bind-xml name="ParameterList" node="element" QName-prefix="" />
</field>
</class>
do i have a chance to omit this ns prefixes for subelements using mapping.xml?
Regards,
mesut
On 9/27/05, Mesut Celik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Keith,
> answers below...
>
> On 9/27/05, Keith Visco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > As far as I understand it, qualified and unqualified indicate which
> > namespace an element belongs to, not whether or not it should have a
> > prefix.
> that's not completely correct. "Qualified" means every subelement must
> have a namespace prefix. "Unqualified" means no subelement is allowed
> to have a namespace prefix which relatively indicates that subelement
> belongs to the namespace of its parent.
>
> So you can have an unprefixed element which is still qualified
> > with the default namespace declaration.
> if you have an unprefixed local element, not parent, this says your
> xml is unqualified.
>
> You can also have a prefixed
> > element which is unqualified by having a prefix which maps to an empty
> > namespace.
> each subelement which is prefixed by a namespace refers to an qualified
> message.
>
> here the critical part is we only focus on subelements so that we make
> a conclusion if an xml is qualified.
>
> please look at this document from w3c.org to get familiar with this issues.
> http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-0/#NS
>
> what amazes me is that no one else was concerned about this issue before.
> before sending the complete case I just wanna learn how castor handles
> this qualification/unqualification issue.
>
> Thanks in advance,
> mesut
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >
> > In any case, it sounds like there may be a bug here. Can you provide a
> > small, but complete example which I could look at further.
>
>
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > --Keith
> >
> > Mesut Celik wrote:
> > > Thats the root element:
> > >
> > > <xs:schema xmlns:xs=http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema
> > > xmlns:xsi=http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance
> > > xmlns:soapenv=http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/
> > > xmlns:soapenc=http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/
> > > xmlns:tns="urn:dslforum-org:cwmp-1-0"
> > > xmlns:cwmp="urn:dslforum-org:cwmp-1-0"
> > > xmlns:wsdl="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/wsdl/";
> > > targetNamespace="urn:dslforum-org:cwmp-1-0"
> > > elementFormDefault="unqualified"
> > > attributeFormDefault="unqualified">
> > >
> > > That's my element definition:
> > >
> > > <xs:element name="Inform">
> > > <xs:complexType>
> > > <xs:sequence>
> > > <xs:element name="Event" type="tns:Event"/>
> > > </xs:sequence>
> > > </xs:complexType>
> > > </xs:element>
> > >
> > > thats a complextype for the Event:
> > >
> > > <xs:complexType name="Event">
> > > <xs:sequence>
> > > <xs:element name="EventStruct" type="tns:EventStruct" minOccurs="1"
> > > maxOccurs="16"/>
> > > </xs:sequence>
> > > <xs:attribute ref="soapenc:arrayType" /> //This part added
> > > </xs:complexType>
> > >
> > > Normally I would expect that serialized form of Inform Element is
> > > unqualified which means that all the subelements of Inform element
> > > must not have namespace prefix. however castor puts this namespace
> > > prefix always in front of the for example Event element.
> > > <cwmp:Inform >
> > > <cwmp:Event soap:arrayType="EventStruct[2]">
> > > <cwmp:EventStruct>
> > > <EventCode>4 VALUE CHANGE</EventCode>
> > > <CommandKey></CommandKey>
> > > </cwmp:EventStruct>
> > > </cwmp:Event>
> > > </cwmp:Inform>
> > >
> > > Maybe the reason is Event has a global complex type definition which
> > > conflicts with Event element definition inside the Inform complex-type
> > > definition.
> > >
> > > I hope everything is clear. I can give more information in case of
> > > confusion...
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 9/26/05, Werner Guttmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > >>Mesut,
> > >>
> > >>can you please include the relevant parts of the XML Schema instance you
> > >>are using, i.e. at least the root element ?
> > >>
> > >>Thanks
> > >>Werner
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>________________________________
> > >>
> > >> From: Mesut Celik [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >> Sent: Monday, September 26, 2005 4:39 PM
> > >> To: [email protected]
> > >> Subject: [castor-user] Re: elementFormDefault is not working in
> > >>unqualified mode
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> please respond your opinions.
> > >> any idea would be appreciated.
> > >>
> > >> regards,
> > >> mesut
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On 9/16/05, Mesut Celik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Hi all,
> > >>
> > >> I have a xml schema in which i defined
> > >>"elementFormDefault" as "unqualified". I use this schema to generate
> > >>java object model which we use in our protocol layer.
> > >> however, I saw that after marshalling operation, castor
> > >>qualifies all the local elements although elementFormDefault is
> > >>unqualified.
> > >>
> > >> what can be the cause of the problem? Im using a binding
> > >>file but I didnt see anything accidently change the default behaviour.
> > >>
> > >> any help appreciated!...
> > >> mesut
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>-------------------------------------------------
> > >>If you wish to unsubscribe from this list, please
> > >>send an empty message to the following address:
> > >>
> > >>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >>-------------------------------------------------
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > > -------------------------------------------------
> > > If you wish to unsubscribe from this list, please
> > > send an empty message to the following address:
> > >
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > -------------------------------------------------
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > -------------------------------------------------
> > If you wish to unsubscribe from this list, please
> > send an empty message to the following address:
> >
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > -------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
>
-------------------------------------------------
If you wish to unsubscribe from this list, please
send an empty message to the following address:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-------------------------------------------------
