What If I do this instead:
<schema>
<blah...>
<results...>
<listOfA minoccurs=0>
<listOfB minoccurs=0>
<listOfC minoccurs=0>
</results>
</blah>
</schema>
Will that be ok? If yes, then I have an option either to define
listOf<?> in the same file, but that will clutter it. So, may be I
will use diff. schema files to define listOf<?> and import it in this
main schema file. What do you say?
~Sandeep
On 1/9/07, Stephen Winnall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
In that case you should be able to write a schema something like this:
<schema>
<blah...>
<results...>
<abstractList>
</results>
</blah>
<listOfA extends abstractList>
<instanceOfA/>*
</listOfA>
<listOfB extends abstractList>
<instanceOfB/>*
</listOfB>
</schema>
but, as I mentioned before, I don't know if the SourceGenerator can
handle this. Presumably you can use an <import> statement to get the
istOf? elements from external files.
Steve
On 9 Jan 2007, at 13:28, Sandeep wrote:
> The latter part only.
>
> ~Sandeep
>
> On 1/9/07, Stephen Winnall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Does that mean you're going to have
>>
>> <blah ...>
>> <results ...>
>> <listOfA>
>> <instanceOfA />
>> </listOfA>
>> <listOfB>
>> <instanceOfB />
>> </listOfB>
>> ...
>> </results>
>> </blah>
>>
>> or:
>>
>> <blah ...>
>> <results ...>
>> <listOfA>
>> <instanceOfA />
>> </listOfA>
>> </results>
>> </blah>
>>
>> <blah ...>
>> <results ...>
>> <listOfB>
>> <instanceOfB />
>> </listOfB>
>> </results>
>> </blah>
>>
>> ...?
>>
>> Steve
>>
>> On 9 Jan 2007, at 12:56, Sandeep wrote:
>>
>> > Slight clarification from my side:
>> >
>> > Every xml instance looks like:
>> > <blah ...>
>> > <results ...>
>> > <listOfA>
>> > <instanceOfA />*
>> > </listOfA>
>> > </results>
>> > </blah>
>> >
>> > Now "listOf<?>" is there for all xml to return a list of element
>> > called <?>
>> > So, in effect by following the same xml structure you can get a
>> list
>> > of Cars, Chocolates, Rivers whatever. There is no relation among
>> the
>> > objects (i.e. <?>).
>> >
>> > Now, if I define a schema for A and B and run Sourcecodegenerator,
>> > classes like "blah" and "results" get generated multiple times!!
>> >
>> > How do I solve this, any idea, anybody?
>> >
>> > ~Sandeep
>> >
>> >
>> > On 1/9/07, Stephen Winnall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> Sandeep
>> >>
>> >> I'm not an expert on XML Schema as such, but I thought it had some
>> >> sort of inheritance so you could define a schema for the following
>> >> sort of structures:
>> >>
>> >> <blah ...>
>> >> <results ...>
>> >> <list>
>> >> <abstactInstanceOfAorBorC />*
>> >> </list>
>> >> </results>
>> >> </blah>
>> >>
>> >> and then specify that <instanceOfA> is-a
>> <abstractInstanceOfAorBorC>.
>> >> There's an introduction to this sort of thing at http://
>> >> www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/library/x-flexschema .
>> >>
>> >> However, I don't know if the SourceGenerator can handle that
>> sort of
>> >> thing.
>> >>
>> >> Steve
>> >>
>> >> On 9 Jan 2007, at 11:11, Sandeep wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > Thanks Steve!
>> >> >
>> >> > Let me tell you my venture into mapping.xml.
>> >> >
>> >> > This is the product I am working for: diff. modules of this
>> product
>> >> > exchange information by passing raw xml over http (legacy
>> stuff, no
>> >> > open standards followed). I am trying to bring in Castor for
>> data
>> >> > binding:-)
>> >> >
>> >> > The xml structure for any object "A" looks somewhat like this:
>> >> > <?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8' ?>
>> >> > <!DOCTYPE blah SYSTEM 'http://10.72.181.103:8088/server.dtd'>
>> >> > <blah version='1.0' xmlns='http://www.blah.com/xml'>
>> >> > <results passes="true">
>> >> > <A>
>> >> > <instanceOfA>
>> >> > </instanceOfA>
>> >> > <instanceOfA>
>> >> > </instanceOfA>
>> >> > ....
>> >> > </A>
>> >> > </results>
>> >> > </blah>
>> >> >
>> >> > Now this is the problem. I have to write schemas for 100s of
>> >> different
>> >> > objects like A.
>> >> > But then all the schemas will begin with blah and results and
>> >> then the
>> >> > actual "meat".
>> >> >
>> >> > So, I decided to go for mapping (and thanks to its location
>> >> attribute)
>> >> > like the below:
>> >> > <mapping>
>> >> > <class name="CollectionOfA" auto-complete="true">
>> >> > <map-to xml="blah" />
>> >> > <field name="listOfA" collection="arraylist"
>> >> type="BeanOfA" >
>> >> > <bind-xml name="instanceOfA"
>> >> location="results/A" />
>> >> > </field>
>> >> > </class>
>> >> > <class name="BeanOfA" auto-complete="true">
>> >> > .....and all the properties of A goes here
>> >> > </class>
>> >> > </mapping>
>> >> >
>> >> > Do you see any solution for defining schemas for all those beans
>> >> where
>> >> > every xml has those blah/results to begin with?
>> >> >
>> >> > ~Sandeep
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > On 1/9/07, Stephen Winnall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> >> I think that working from an XML schema is to be preferred
>> if you
>> >> >> have that option. The advantages are
>> >> >>
>> >> >> 1) you can do a good design for your XML;
>> >> >> 2) you can reuse any standards which might be available.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Since data tends to hang around much longer than programs
>> (and get
>> >> >> processed by more than one language), I'd spend more time
>> >> making sure
>> >> >> the data was as well organised as possible.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Steve
>> >> >>
>> >> >> On 9 Jan 2007, at 10:33, Sandeep wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > Hi
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Which is better:
>> >> >> > 1. Define a schema for a java bean, auto-generate the source
>> >> >> code and
>> >> >> > get the validation done by castor while populating the
>> bean from
>> >> >> a xml
>> >> >> > instance.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > 2. Hand code the java bean. Define a mapping file.
>> Populate the
>> >> >> java
>> >> >> > bean from a xml instance through castor. I don't think I
>> need to
>> >> >> > define a schema here (correct me, if I am wrong)
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Advantage for 1) is validation of data types and values
>> can be
>> >> >> > performed by castor.
>> >> >> > Advantages for 2) are flexibility to add application specific
>> >> >> helper
>> >> >> > methods to the bean, or when you cannot touch the source for
>> >> the
>> >> >> > bean.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Obviously, advantage of one is the disadvantage for the
>> other.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > So, how can I get the best of both worlds? I want to hand
>> code
>> >> >> my bean
>> >> >> > class (not use SourceCodegenerator). I want to define the
>> schema
>> >> >> apart
>> >> >> > from the mapping so that castor can validate the xml instance
>> >> >> against
>> >> >> > the schema for both data types and some values.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > TIA
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > ~Sandeep
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> >> > To unsubscribe from this list please visit:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
>> >> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> >> To unsubscribe from this list please visit:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> > To unsubscribe from this list please visit:
>> >> >
>> >> > http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> To unsubscribe from this list please visit:
>> >>
>> >> http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > To unsubscribe from this list please visit:
>> >
>> > http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
>> >
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe from this list please visit:
>>
>> http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
>>
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this list please visit:
>
> http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list please visit:
http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list please visit:
http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
