Aki Yoshida-3 wrote > 2014-08-05 14:35 GMT+02:00 Timo Hosters < > thosters@
> >: >> Aki Yoshida-3 wrote >>> ... and got a fix in their microwave. >> >> I'm not a native speaker, thus unsure if that is colloquialism, sarcasm >> or >> some sort of saying? It could mean "fixing could be quick if someone >> already >> had an idea", I guess. > > me neither. But you got what I meant (this microwave 5 minutes fix > often happens with Dan. When I start explaining about a problem, > before I finish, he writes "got a fix". I say "wow", and 5 minutes > later, he says "just pushed the fix to the repo". ;-) > > I think the fix might be easy but I can't say more without spending > some time to look at it. I see. Thanks for the clarification! Aki Yoshida-3 wrote >> The redefine idea was motivated from posts like this one >> <http://stackoverflow.com/questions/10084145/xsd-extend-a-complex-type> >> >> . >> And it sounded to be reasonable at the time - and still does. > > The page also talks about this redefine being all or nothing. In > other words, everyone has to see the new redefined schema along with > the old one. If this is not the case, you will have problems in > exchanging data. So, as I mentioned earlier, this redefine is used > typically in some closed/isolated environment where this condition > holds but not in distributed applications like web services where you > have no control over different systems. Understood. By now I really get the feeling it is better to reconsider and step away from the redefine-approach. Regards, Timo -- View this message in context: http://cxf.547215.n5.nabble.com/Question-CXF-generate-Web-Service-issue-when-using-xsd-redefine-tp5746898p5747814.html Sent from the cxf-user mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
