W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xsd-databinding@w3.org > April 2006

RE: ISSUE-34: multiple schemas for a single namespace

From: <Paul.V.Biron@kp.org>
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 09:20:51 -0700
To: gcowe@origoservices.com
Cc: paul.downey@bt.com, public-xsd-databinding@w3.org, public-xsd-databinding-request@w3.org
Message-Id: <OF5C6FDD27.5CFABDF8-ON8825715C.00593651-8825715C.0059C9D4@KP.ORG>

> The schemas are different but belong in the same 'domain'. I will 
> supply a cut down example to demonstrate this. A lot of the 
> information supplied in the request is echoed back in the response 
> but with additional information included (hence the request schema 
> is almost a subset of the response schema). A particular domain (e.
> g. Quotes & New Business) has several product specific elements but 
> also has several common elements (like policy-holder address). The 
> namespace is shared across the domain which is
> represented by several product specific schemas each having a 
> request and response schema. 

This is a very common pattern so hopefully the WG will not provide any 
advice to avoid it.

> >> In WSDL we have a request-response service with a request message 
> >> and a response message defined separately.
> This doesn't work when combining the schemas due the complex types 
> with same name but differing content that appear in each of the 
> separate schemas. We would need to rename elements in the schema to 
> allow combining both the request and response into one schema. 
> I think the tools have made a big assumption when it comes to the 
> decision to use the namespace to name the packages. 

That's a problem with the WSDL spec and not some data binding tool.  I 
know, because I submitted a comment to the WSDL WG that they should fix 
this (the solution I offered was to partition the type spec in to input, 
output or both spaces), but they declined to change their spec.

> >> When using data binding tools to generate code from the WSDL 
> >> (Apache Axis 1.3 WSDL2Java in our case) the target namespace is
> >> used to name the packages containing the generated classes.
> >OK, but there is usually an override to assert a package name
> >for generated classes, this seems like something we could
> >encourage toolkits to support.

Yes, this is something that the WG should STRONGLY suggest to tool 

Received on Wednesday, 26 April 2006 16:22:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:42:56 UTC