You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to commons-dev@ws.apache.org by Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org> on 2010/09/27 23:35:40 UTC
XmlSchema 2.0
Now that XmlSchema 1.4.7 is out the door, I think it's probably a good time to
relook at the ideas for 2.0 and maybe push for that.
I looked at the trunk this afternoon to kind of see where we're at. While I
only looked briefly, it defintely looks like a much needed improvement. The
typed collections are great and moving some of the utilities we have in CXF
into the stuff in XmlSchema definitely would simplify things.
Benson: do you remember where things were at? Aka: any idea what is left to
do? Actually, it might be good as a starting point for discussion if you
could summarize what has been done as well so everyone is aware.
I merged some of my hacks for the DOM level 3 stuff to trunk. However, if
we're on Java 5+ only, the stuff built into the JDK is dom level 3 so the old
stuff could potentially be removed. I'll try and get to that.
The poms need some minor updates as well, particularly for the eclipse setup,
but nothing too major.
--
Daniel Kulp
dkulp@apache.org
http://dankulp.com/blog
Re: XmlSchema 2.0
Posted by Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org>.
On Monday 27 September 2010 5:43:47 pm Benson Margulies wrote:
> Dan,
>
> I think that I would claim that the trunk has all the functionality of
> the 1.4 branch. Which is to say, it does not have any more support for
> the redefine element than before, and there are probably a few other
> ugly cases that never worked.
Well, that's all good. :-)
>
> I think that, when I left off, I thought that the next step was to try
> to plug it into CXF and see it it worked and/or if some flaw in my
> data model thinking was manifested. A big fun area was my attempt to
> do something rational with the cases of inter-schema links (i.e.
> ref=).
>
> I am all in favor of the changes you describe in ditching pre-1.5-specific
> code.
>
> A CXF branch would then be the next logical thing.
Well, once we get 2.3 out the door, I'll create a 2.3-fixes branch for furthur
2.3 updates and trunk will open up for more future things. Updating to
XmlSchema 2.0 and WSS4J 1.6 are definitely on the list of things for that
effort.
> I don't think that Axis and friends are planning to move to a 1.5
> platform, so in terms of the 'frequent fliers' of XmlSchema
> dependencies inside Apache, CXF is it.
Uhm... Axis2 is 1.5+ only as well. Thus, they MAY be interested.
> One sort of silly problem is the web site; we will want to have both
> branches described, so having a site entirely built from the
> maven-site-plugin won't fly.
Confluence? :-)
Dan
>
> --benson
>
> On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 5:35 PM, Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org> wrote:
> > Now that XmlSchema 1.4.7 is out the door, I think it's probably a good
> > time to relook at the ideas for 2.0 and maybe push for that.
> >
> > I looked at the trunk this afternoon to kind of see where we're at.
> > While I only looked briefly, it defintely looks like a much needed
> > improvement. The typed collections are great and moving some of the
> > utilities we have in CXF into the stuff in XmlSchema definitely would
> > simplify things.
> >
> > Benson: do you remember where things were at? Aka: any idea what is
> > left to do? Actually, it might be good as a starting point for
> > discussion if you could summarize what has been done as well so everyone
> > is aware.
> >
> > I merged some of my hacks for the DOM level 3 stuff to trunk. However,
> > if we're on Java 5+ only, the stuff built into the JDK is dom level 3 so
> > the old stuff could potentially be removed. I'll try and get to that.
> >
> > The poms need some minor updates as well, particularly for the eclipse
> > setup, but nothing too major.
> >
> >
> > --
> > Daniel Kulp
> > dkulp@apache.org
> > http://dankulp.com/blog
--
Daniel Kulp
dkulp@apache.org
http://dankulp.com/blog
Re: XmlSchema 2.0
Posted by Andreas Veithen <an...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 23:43, Benson Margulies <bi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dan,
>
> I think that I would claim that the trunk has all the functionality of
> the 1.4 branch. Which is to say, it does not have any more support for
> the redefine element than before, and there are probably a few other
> ugly cases that never worked.
>
> I think that, when I left off, I thought that the next step was to try
> to plug it into CXF and see it it worked and/or if some flaw in my
> data model thinking was manifested. A big fun area was my attempt to
> do something rational with the cases of inter-schema links (i.e.
> ref=).
>
> I am all in favor of the changes you describe in ditching pre-1.5-specific code.
>
> A CXF branch would then be the next logical thing.
>
> I don't think that Axis and friends are planning to move to a 1.5
> platform,
Axis is not moving to Java 5, but Axis2 has already done that with the
1.5 release.
> so in terms of the 'frequent fliers' of XmlSchema
> dependencies inside Apache, CXF is it.
We are currently in the (painful) process of getting Axis2 1.6 out.
Once that is done, we have the opportunity to move to XmlSchema 2.0. I
think it would actually be the right moment to do that.
> One sort of silly problem is the web site; we will want to have both
> branches described, so having a site entirely built from the
> maven-site-plugin won't fly.
>
> --benson
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 5:35 PM, Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> Now that XmlSchema 1.4.7 is out the door, I think it's probably a good time to
>> relook at the ideas for 2.0 and maybe push for that.
>>
>> I looked at the trunk this afternoon to kind of see where we're at. While I
>> only looked briefly, it defintely looks like a much needed improvement. The
>> typed collections are great and moving some of the utilities we have in CXF
>> into the stuff in XmlSchema definitely would simplify things.
>>
>> Benson: do you remember where things were at? Aka: any idea what is left to
>> do? Actually, it might be good as a starting point for discussion if you
>> could summarize what has been done as well so everyone is aware.
>>
>> I merged some of my hacks for the DOM level 3 stuff to trunk. However, if
>> we're on Java 5+ only, the stuff built into the JDK is dom level 3 so the old
>> stuff could potentially be removed. I'll try and get to that.
>>
>> The poms need some minor updates as well, particularly for the eclipse setup,
>> but nothing too major.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Daniel Kulp
>> dkulp@apache.org
>> http://dankulp.com/blog
>>
>
Re: XmlSchema 2.0
Posted by Benson Margulies <bi...@gmail.com>.
Dan,
I think that I would claim that the trunk has all the functionality of
the 1.4 branch. Which is to say, it does not have any more support for
the redefine element than before, and there are probably a few other
ugly cases that never worked.
I think that, when I left off, I thought that the next step was to try
to plug it into CXF and see it it worked and/or if some flaw in my
data model thinking was manifested. A big fun area was my attempt to
do something rational with the cases of inter-schema links (i.e.
ref=).
I am all in favor of the changes you describe in ditching pre-1.5-specific code.
A CXF branch would then be the next logical thing.
I don't think that Axis and friends are planning to move to a 1.5
platform, so in terms of the 'frequent fliers' of XmlSchema
dependencies inside Apache, CXF is it.
One sort of silly problem is the web site; we will want to have both
branches described, so having a site entirely built from the
maven-site-plugin won't fly.
--benson
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 5:35 PM, Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Now that XmlSchema 1.4.7 is out the door, I think it's probably a good time to
> relook at the ideas for 2.0 and maybe push for that.
>
> I looked at the trunk this afternoon to kind of see where we're at. While I
> only looked briefly, it defintely looks like a much needed improvement. The
> typed collections are great and moving some of the utilities we have in CXF
> into the stuff in XmlSchema definitely would simplify things.
>
> Benson: do you remember where things were at? Aka: any idea what is left to
> do? Actually, it might be good as a starting point for discussion if you
> could summarize what has been done as well so everyone is aware.
>
> I merged some of my hacks for the DOM level 3 stuff to trunk. However, if
> we're on Java 5+ only, the stuff built into the JDK is dom level 3 so the old
> stuff could potentially be removed. I'll try and get to that.
>
> The poms need some minor updates as well, particularly for the eclipse setup,
> but nothing too major.
>
>
> --
> Daniel Kulp
> dkulp@apache.org
> http://dankulp.com/blog
>