Bruno Dusausoy-2 wrote: > > So, in fact, I have two questions : > - What am I doing wrong here ? > - Is there a way to say that these two definitions should actually be > mapped to only one class ? >
1.) This may not be the problem at all, but to rule out the problem being with Default options and to use the "traditional" method of designating a JAXB binding file, can you use this method given here: http://www.jroller.com/gmazza/entry/customizing_jaxb_artifacts#XJCOpts by using extraarg to identify the JAXB binding file (you can still using <binding> for the JAX-WS one) and placing both within the wsdlOption section for *each* WSDL? <extraarg>-xjc-b,myjaxbbindingfile.xjb</extraarg> i.e., don't use Default options at all and just duplicate the config under each WSDL? 2.) You can try episode files in order to curtail generation of a particular class -- that might get rid of your original naming conflict error. Within the episode file, you specify you want Class A to represent XML element B. See the same link I gave above for further info on episode files. Also, the jaxb:javaType mentioned at the bottom of step #2 could possibly help you here: http://www.jroller.com/gmazza/entry/customizing_jaxb_artifacts#BindingFile HTH, Glen -- View this message in context: http://cxf.547215.n5.nabble.com/JAXB-binding-and-multiple-definitions-tp1834517p1842253.html Sent from the cxf-user mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
