Thanks Jochen, it works like a charm!
Just a curiosity... I had to rewrite my XSDs for this solution to work from
something like this:
<xs:element name="FH_SN" nillable="true" minOccurs="0"
type="xs:double">
<xs:simpleType>
<xs:restriction base="xs:double">
<xs:annotation>
<xs:appinfo>
<jxb:property>
<jxb:baseType>
<jxb:javaType name="java.lang.Double"/>
</jxb:baseType>
</jxb:property>
</xs:appinfo>
</xs:annotation>
</xs:restriction>
</xs:simpleType>
</xs:element>
to this:
<xs:element name="FH_SN" nillable="true" minOccurs="0"
type="xs:double">
<xs:annotation>
<xs:appinfo>
<jxb:property>
<jxb:baseType>
<jxb:javaType name="java.lang.Double"/>
</jxb:baseType>
</jxb:property>
</xs:appinfo>
</xs:annotation>
</xs:element>
which BTW seems a more concise and elegant notation but... are you aware of
any significant difference between both ways? why first one didn't work?
Thanks for your help,
Jose Luis.
2007/7/10, Jochen Wiedmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
On 7/10/07, Jose Luis Huertas Fernández
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> any idea? is it possible to setup jaxme to use Double (object) type
instead
> of double (primitive)?
Yes, that's possible. See for example this mail:
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg01553.html
Jochen
--
"Besides, manipulating elections is under penalty of law, resulting in
a preventative effect against manipulating elections.
The german government justifying the use of electronic voting machines
and obviously believing that we don't need a police, because all
illegal actions are forbidden.
http://dip.bundestag.de/btd/16/051/1605194.pdf
