Keith,
I've tried this several times. I don't see a difference.
Builder properties file has:
org.exolab.castor.builder.javaclassmapping=type
The following class files are always built. I've checked and rechecked.
The builder file is being picked up.
VehicleTitle, VehicleTitleDescriptor (top level element?) ok
Owner,OwnerDescriptor (2nd level element) don't want this, it's a Party
Registrant, RegistrantDescriptor (2nd level element) don't want this,
it's a Party
Party, PartyDescripter (ComplexType) ok
Lien,LienDescriptor (ComplexType) ok
Lienholder, LienholderDescriptor (2nd level element) don't want this,
it's a Party
Owner, Registrant, Lienholder are all derived from Party, so technically
it is correct. But of course I'd like to be able to assign the same
Party as both the owner and registrant, and this is not possible.
This scenario appears fairly common (to me I guess). Is there something
I can do in the binding file to help this?
-paul
Schema below
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<xsd:schema xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema";
xmlns:bulk="urn:trivininc.com/bulk"
targetNamespace="urn:trivininc.com/bulk" elementFormDefault="qualified"
attributeFormDefault="unqualified">
<xsd:element name="VehicleTitle">
<xsd:complexType>
<xsd:sequence>
<xsd:element name="Owner" type="bulk:Party"/>
<xsd:element name="Registrant" type="bulk:Party"/>
</xsd:sequence>
</xsd:complexType>
</xsd:element>
<xsd:complexType name="Lien">
<xsd:all>
<xsd:element name="LienID" type="xsd:string"/>
<xsd:element name="Lienholder" type="bulk:Party"/>
</xsd:all>
</xsd:complexType>
<xsd:complexType name="Party">
<xsd:all>
<xsd:element name="LastName" type="xsd:string"/>
<xsd:element name="FirstName" type="xsd:string"/>
</xsd:all>
</xsd:complexType>
</xsd:schema>
-----Original Message-----
From: Keith Visco [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2005 4:42 PM
To: castor-dev@exolab.org
Subject: Re: [castor-dev] Source Generator - Advice/help? please
Hi Paul,
With the type-approach Castor will generate classes for all complexTypes
and any top-level elements. With the element-approach castor will
generate a class for all elements and all complexTypes.
You should definately see a difference in the classes generated for both
types. Did you delete the existing classes first before trying to
regenerate?
--Keith
Paul Grillo wrote:
> I tried both element and type and I get the same 12 classes generated.
> Just tried it again to make sure I didn't miss anything, but there
> appears to be no difference. I did check to insure it was picking up
> my builder properties file (just in case) by also asking it to extend
> from a super class.
>
> It still looks like I get a class for every element that is of a
> complex type I've defined and that the getters for each require it to
> be cast as such. I'm trying to figure a workaround in my code that
> uses the classes, but it's sort of ugly. Hoping there was a clearcut
approach.
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Keith Visco [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2005 2:25 PM
> To: castor-dev@exolab.org
> Subject: Re: [castor-dev] Source Generator - Advice/help? please
>
>
> Paul,
>
> Try generating your source code using the "type" approach. You can
> specify this in the "castorbuilder.properties" or in a binding-file if
> you're using one.
>
> http://castor.exolab.org/sourcegen.html#Class-Creation/Mapping
>
> --Keith
>
>
> Paul Grillo wrote:
>
>>I would really appreciate some help on this, i'm sort of up against
>>it. any help would be "greatly" appreciated...
>>
>>I have a fairly complex schema that i'm generating java for. I have
>>flexibility to change the schema, write binding files, or whatever. I
>
>
>>guess i'm having a problem understanding how to get the source
>>generator to do what i think is fairly straightforward.
>>
>>I have reproduced this as simply as possible:
>>
>>The schema/object model contains the following:
>>
>>VehicleTitle (top level element), contains an Owner, Registrant, and a
>
>
>>Lien. The Lien contains a LienID and a Lienholder. Owner,
>>Registrant, and Lienholder are all the same type (Party).
>>
>>So what i'm hoping to get is (more or less) are classes representing
>>VehicleTitle, Party, Lien. With getter/setters for
>>Owner/Registrant/Lienholder of type Party. It would seem to me that
>>what i' m asking for are classes for only the top level elements or
>>complex types.
>>
>>However i get classes for Lienholder, Registrant, Owner (all derived
>>from PartyType). This is problematic. In my realworld schema I have
>>the Party Object used in many many places and can't afford to have
>>classes generated for every element that references it.
>>
>>Is there a way to acheive my objective? Different approach to the
>>schema? If i need entries in the binding file (i've tried a few),
>>please please somebody provide me with the simple example as it is not
>
>
>>clear (to me anyway) how to achieve it there.
>>
>>
>>The schema is below. I have a single top level element, and
>>everything else is a ComplexType that can be used througout.
>>
>>Is this the preferred/advisable way to define the schema to acheive
>>the above objective?
>>
>><?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <xsd:schema
>>xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema";
>>xmlns:bulk="urn:trivininc.com/bulk"
>>targetNamespace="urn:trivininc.com/bulk"
>
> elementFormDefault="qualified"
>
>>attributeFormDefault="unqualified">
>> <xsd:element name="VehicleTitle">
>> <xsd:complexType>
>> <xsd:sequence>
>> <xsd:element name="Owner" type="bulk:Party"/>
>> <xsd:element name="Registrant" type="bulk:Party"/>
>> </xsd:sequence>
>> </xsd:complexType>
>> </xsd:element>
>> <xsd:complexType name="Lien">
>> <xsd:all>
>> <xsd:element name="LienID" type="xsd:string"/>
>> <xsd:element name="Lienholder" type="bulk:Party"/>
>> </xsd:all>
>> </xsd:complexType>
>> <xsd:complexType name="Party">
>> <xsd:all>
>> <xsd:element name="LastName" type="xsd:string"/>
>> <xsd:element name="FirstName" type="xsd:string"/>
>> </xsd:all>
>> </xsd:complexType>
>></xsd:schema>
>>
>>
>>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>--
>>
>>-----------------------------------------------------------
>>If you wish to unsubscribe from this mailing, send mail to
>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of:
>> unsubscribe castor-dev
>
>
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> If you wish to unsubscribe from this mailing, send mail to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of:
> unsubscribe castor-dev
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> --
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> If you wish to unsubscribe from this mailing, send mail to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of:
> unsubscribe castor-dev
-----------------------------------------------------------
If you wish to unsubscribe from this mailing, send mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of:
unsubscribe castor-dev
-----------------------------------------------------------
If you wish to unsubscribe from this mailing, send mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of:
unsubscribe castor-dev
