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/jaxme-dev@ws.apache.org/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