Hi Karolis, true, this is ticket is the best place for your patch :)
Thanks, Tammo On 02.02.2011 00:48, Karolis Petrauskas wrote: > Hi Tammo, > > Thank you for your reply. I will open JIRA ticket with my patch > attached. It looks like my patch also relates to > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ODE-664. > > Thanks, > Karolis Petrauskas > > On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 3:50 PM, Tammo van Lessen <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hi Karolis, >> >> sorry for the belated reply. What you describe is a indeed a bug. From >> your text I don't understand what your approach exactly is, what about >> opening a JIRA and attaching your patch so that we can review it? >> Patches and contributions always welcome :) >> >> Thanks, >> Tammo >> >> On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 23:09, Karolis Petrauskas <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> I'm using Apache ODE in my project to run processes. Inheritance >>> of complex types is heavily used in the XML schemes of the web >>> services. As a consequence, xsi:type attributes are used in the >>> messages extensively. Here I faced some problems. It seems ODE tries >>> to remove XML declarations of namespaces, that are not used in the >>> document. This optimization unfortunately does not take xsi:type >>> attributes into consideration. As a consequence, message like this >>> (pseudo code): >>> <message xmlns="messageNS"> >>> <order xsi:type="o:MyOrder" xmlns:o="orderNS" >>> xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"/> >>> </message> >>> converts to something like this (pseudocode again): >>> <message xmlns="messageNS"> >>> <order xsi:type="o:MyOrder" >>> xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"/> >>> </message> >>> i.e. xmlns:o="orderNS" is removed, as the prefix "o" is not referenced >>> anywhere except the contents of the xsi:type attribute. Resulting >>> document is not valid anymore if complex type "MyOrder" was derived >>> from an abstract complex type. >>> >>> I have fixed this behavior and it works at least for my process. >>> The side effect is that a lot of unneeded namespace declarations are >>> now passed around. In my case it is better than corrupted messages. I >>> want to contribute my patch to ODE, but I'm not shore, if my approach >>> is OK and would like to get your opinion about this issue. >>> >>> Looking forward for your comments, >>> Karolis Petrauskas >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Tammo van Lessen - http://www.taval.de -- Tammo van Lessen - http://www.taval.de
