In my comparison of results from v0.9.6 and v1.0.5, it seems like Castor
complains about situations like this:
-------------
<xs:complexType name="BorrowerType">
<xs:complexContent>
<xs:extension base="crm:CustomerType"/>
</xs:complexContent>
</xs:complexType>
<xs:complexType name="OwnersType">
<xs:sequence>
<xs:element name="Borrower" type="BorrowerType"
minOccurs="0"/>
</xs:sequence>
</xs:complexType>
<xs:complexType name="DocumentType">
<xs:sequence>
<xs:element name="Borrower" type="BorrowerType"
minOccurs="0"/>
</xs:sequence>
</xs:complexType>
-------------
Warning: A class name generation conflict has occured between element
'complexType:OwnersType/Borrower' and element
'complexType:DocumentType/Borrower'
I don't think we saw this problem with v0.9.6.
Logically, it seems like I could fix this in two different ways:
* Use a binding file to specify different classes for OwnersTypeBorrower
and DocumentTypeBorrower.
* Declare Borrower as a standalone element and use "ref" in each of
these two elements.
I'd say either of these choices have tradeoffs. The first has a bit of
a Java smell, and the second a bit of schema smell.
What do you think?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list please visit:
http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
