Gabriel Roldan wrote:
> guys, I'm more than willing to try and provide my view from the past
> experience with the overrides and all but I guess I'm quite loosing the
> point of the discussion, sorry.
>
> Ben can you rephrase what the actual problem is with the bindings please?
>
>
Afaik there
guys, I'm more than willing to try and provide my view from the past
experience with the overrides and all but I guess I'm quite loosing the
point of the discussion, sorry.
Ben can you rephrase what the actual problem is with the bindings please?
thanks
Gabriel
Justin Deoliveira wrote:
> Ben
Ben Caradoc-Davies wrote:
> Justin Deoliveira wrote:
>> Ben Caradoc-Davies wrote:
>> Hmmm... I don't see it this way. I mean... every in geoserver there is
>> now the decision, if simple feature so this, if complex feature do
>> that. I don't see why it cant be the same for GML encoding. If simpl
Ben Caradoc-Davies wrote:
> Justin Deoliveira wrote:
>> Ben Caradoc-Davies wrote:
>>> Justin Deoliveira wrote:
So with the (FPT,GU) tuple returned, the binding for
FeaturePropertyType is up next, and it will be asked for its
properties being passed in the GU feature.
>>> With gml:F
Justin Deoliveira wrote:
> Ben Caradoc-Davies wrote:
>> Justin Deoliveira wrote:
>>> So with the (FPT,GU) tuple returned, the binding for
>>> FeaturePropertyType is up next, and it will be asked for its
>>> properties being passed in the GU feature.
>> With gml:FeaturePropertyType it works. The p
Justin Deoliveira wrote:
> Ben Caradoc-Davies wrote:
> Hmmm... I don't see it this way. I mean... every in geoserver there is
> now the decision, if simple feature so this, if complex feature do that.
> I don't see why it cant be the same for GML encoding. If simple feature
> use the regular WFS
Ben Caradoc-Davies wrote:
> Justin Deoliveira wrote:
>> So with the (FPT,GU) tuple returned, the binding for
>> FeaturePropertyType is up next, and it will be asked for its
>> properties being passed in the GU feature.
>
> With gml:FeaturePropertyType it works. The problem I have is that I have
Ben Caradoc-Davies wrote:
> Ben Caradoc-Davies wrote:
>> What is the base type of a complexType that extends nothing?
>> XS.COMPLEXTYPE?
>
> Or is that just the name of the complexType element in XMLSchema.xsd?
>
I think this is just the schema or xml schema... so not really relevant
in an actu
Ben Caradoc-Davies wrote:
> Justin Deoliveira wrote:
>> Ben Caradoc-Davies wrote:
>>> (1) How do I register a second binding for GML.AbstractFeatureType
>>> when one already exists? If I do this, many unit tests break.
>> You will have to override it. What I would expect to see is a separate
>> C
Ben Caradoc-Davies wrote:
> What is the base type of a complexType that extends nothing?
> XS.COMPLEXTYPE?
Or is that just the name of the complexType element in XMLSchema.xsd?
--
Ben Caradoc-Davies
Software Engineer, CSIRO Exploration and Mining
Australian Resources Research Centre
26 Dick Pe
Justin Deoliveira wrote:
> So with the (FPT,GU) tuple returned, the binding for FeaturePropertyType
> is up next, and it will be asked for its properties being passed in the
> GU feature.
With gml:FeaturePropertyType it works. The problem I have is that I have
gsml:GeologicFeaturePropertyType w
Justin Deoliveira wrote:
> Ben Caradoc-Davies wrote:
>> (1) How do I register a second binding for GML.AbstractFeatureType when
>> one already exists? If I do this, many unit tests break.
> You will have to override it. What I would expect to see is a separate
> Configuration instance for "comple
Ben Caradoc-Davies wrote:
> Ben Caradoc-Davies wrote:
>> (3) How do I write a binding for GML types whose name is not known at
>> compile time? In my earlier example GeologicFeaturePropertyType is a
>> complex type defined in an application schema.
>
> Please correct me if I am wrong, but my und
Ben Caradoc-Davies wrote:
> (3) How do I write a binding for GML types whose name is not known at
> compile time? In my earlier example GeologicFeaturePropertyType is a
> complex type defined in an application schema.
Please correct me if I am wrong, but my understanding is that it is the
respo
Ben Caradoc-Davies wrote:
> Justin Deoliveira wrote:
>> Ideally everything is handed by bindings, and there is only a
>> BindingPropertyExtractor. My advise to you is to have everything
>> handled by a special AbstractFeatureTypeBinding for complex content.
>
> (1) How do I register a second bin
Justin Deoliveira wrote:
> Ideally everything is handed by bindings, and there is only a
> BindingPropertyExtractor. My advise to you is to have everything handled
> by a special AbstractFeatureTypeBinding for complex content.
(1) How do I register a second binding for GML.AbstractFeatureType wh
Ben Caradoc-Davies wrote:
> Justin,
>
> Encoder and its friends are labyrinthine. It is very hard to follow what
> it is doing. Is there any manual or documentation?
>
Unfortunately not to the level you are looking. I suggest you read the
javadoc of the binding interfaces to get an idea of how
One of the reasons they are hard to follow is that they are very
dynamic; consider the alternatives of generating a parser based on a
schema for example - we are doing something similar; constructing a
data structure based on the schema and then "executing" it to parse
(or encode.
Have you read th
Justin,
Encoder and its friends are labyrinthine. It is very hard to follow what
it is doing. Is there any manual or documentation?
Are PropertyExtractors additive? That is, are the properties extracted
by BindingPropertyExtractor added to those extracted by any other?
Is seems impossible to a
19 matches
Mail list logo
