castor

java classes generated overwriting due to similar names in XML

Details

  • Type: Test Test
  • Status: Closed Closed
  • Priority: Critical Critical
  • Resolution: Duplicate
  • Affects Version/s: 0.9.6
  • Fix Version/s: 1.0.2
  • Component/s: XML code generator
  • Labels:
    None
  • Number of attachments :
    1

Description

Here is my binding file <?xml version="1.0"?> > > <cbf:binding xmlns:cbf="http://www.castor.org/SourceGenerator/Binding" > defaultBindingType="type" includeURI="C:/Shared.xsd"> > > <cbf:package> > > <cbf:name>rate.request</cbf:name> > > <cbf:schemaLocation>C:/ > Request.xsd</cbf:schemaLocation> > > </cbf:package> > > <Unable to render embedded object: File (complexTypeBinding name="Person"> > > <cbf:java-class name="Person"/> > > <) not found.-special name for the second street --> > > <cbf:elementBinding name="complexType: Person > /Name"> > > <cbf:java-class package=" > rate.request.testing" name="PersonName"/> > > </cbf:elementBinding> > > </cbf:complexTypeBinding> > > <cbf:complexTypeBinding name="Comapny"> > > <cbf:java-class name=" Comapny "/> > > <Unable to render embedded object: File (elementBinding name="complexType: Comapny > /Name"> > > <cbf:java-class package=" > rate.request.testing" name=" Comapny Name"/> > > </cbf:elementBinding> > > </cbf:complexTypeBinding> > > > > <cbf:complexTypeBinding name="Department"> > > <cbf:java-class name=" Department "/> > > <) not found.-special name for the second street --> > > <cbf:elementBinding name="complexType: > Department /Name"> > > <cbf:java-class package=" > rate.request.testing" name=" Department Name"/> > > </cbf:elementBinding> > > </cbf:complexTypeBinding> > > </cbf:binding> Here is the XSD <xsd:complexType name="Comapny"> >>> <xsd:sequence> >>> <xsd:element name="Name" type="xsd:string"/> >>> <xsd:element name="type"> >>> <xsd:simpleType> >>> <xsd:restriction base="xsd:string"> >>> <xsd:enumeration value="A1"/> >>> <xsd:enumeration value="A2"/> >>> <xsd:enumeration value="A3"/> >>> </xsd:restriction> >>> </xsd:simpleType> >>> </xsd:element> >>> </xsd:sequence> >>> </xsd:complexType> >>> <xsd:complexType name="Person"> >>> <xsd:sequence> >>> <xsd:element name="Name" type="xsd:string"/> >>> <xsd:element name="type"> >>> <xsd:simpleType> >>> <xsd:restriction base="xsd:string"> >>> <xsd:enumeration value="B1"/> >>> <xsd:enumeration value="B2"/> >>> <xsd:enumeration value="B3"/> >>> </xsd:restriction> >>> </xsd:simpleType> >>> </xsd:element> >>> </xsd:sequence> >>> </xsd:complexType> The types also get overwritten. I have one more problem too. That is the names of the nodes in the generated XML (after many manipulations in the java objects) are seperated with hypens. Pls advice

Issue Links

is duplicated by

Bug - A problem which impairs or prevents the functions of the product. CASTOR-1445 SourceGenerator fails for simpletype/restriction/enumertion with values 'm' and 'M'

  • Major - Major loss of function.
  • Closed - The issue is considered finished, the resolution is correct. Issues which are not closed can be reopened.

Activity

Ascending order - Click to sort in descending order
Hide
Permalink
Werner Guttmann added a comment -

As far as I can tell (by looking into the bindings.xsd XML Schema definition), there was plans to add support for a new <enumBinding> element to allow control over names of the generated (enumeration) classes. Apparently, this never happended. Let me just see what others have to say on this ....

Show
Werner Guttmann added a comment - As far as I can tell (by looking into the bindings.xsd XML Schema definition), there was plans to add support for a new <enumBinding> element to allow control over names of the generated (enumeration) classes. Apparently, this never happended. Let me just see what others have to say on this ....
Hide
Permalink
Werner Guttmann added a comment -

The two files given above (inline) as unified patch relative to src/bugs. After some initial investigation, I believe that as it stands currently it is not possible to allow specification of a clas name or similar for a (simple type based) enumeration. The documentation seems to indicate that there were plans for an <enumBinding> element, but a close look at binding.xsd reveals that this still is commented.

Show
Werner Guttmann added a comment - The two files given above (inline) as unified patch relative to src/bugs. After some initial investigation, I believe that as it stands currently it is not possible to allow specification of a clas name or similar for a (simple type based) enumeration. The documentation seems to indicate that there were plans for an <enumBinding> element, but a close look at binding.xsd reveals that this still is commented.
Hide
Permalink
Keith Visco added a comment -

There were definate plans for a type-safe enum binding. It's been a while so I can't recall if it was non-trivial to implement which led to it being put on the back burner or simply a matter of other things being more important at the time. In any case, it certainly was planned. The binding file is pretty limited and could certainly benefit from some attention in making it better and easier to use.

In this case though, since the user just wants to get past the name conflict I don't think we actually need "<enumBinding>" we just need the SourceGenerator to recognize the following for simpleContent elements:

<complexTypeBinding name="Company">
<java-class name="Company">
<elementBinding name="type">
<java-class name="CompanyType"/>
</elementBinding>
</complexTypeBinding>

I think normally when the SourceGenerator sees an element with simpleContent the name is automatically generated instead of seeing if a match exists in the binding.

So I don't think we need <enumBinding> unless we are trying to change the field names of each enumerated value.

Also, I did notice a typo in the above binding file...in a few cases the prefix "cfb" is being used, where it should be "cbf". But that doesn't help the problem here, so it's moot. I just wanted to point it out for anyone trying to actually run the test case.

Show
Keith Visco added a comment - There were definate plans for a type-safe enum binding. It's been a while so I can't recall if it was non-trivial to implement which led to it being put on the back burner or simply a matter of other things being more important at the time. In any case, it certainly was planned. The binding file is pretty limited and could certainly benefit from some attention in making it better and easier to use. In this case though, since the user just wants to get past the name conflict I don't think we actually need "<enumBinding>" we just need the SourceGenerator to recognize the following for simpleContent elements: <complexTypeBinding name="Company"> <java-class name="Company"> <elementBinding name="type"> <java-class name="CompanyType"/> </elementBinding> </complexTypeBinding> I think normally when the SourceGenerator sees an element with simpleContent the name is automatically generated instead of seeing if a match exists in the binding. So I don't think we need <enumBinding> unless we are trying to change the field names of each enumerated value. Also, I did notice a typo in the above binding file...in a few cases the prefix "cfb" is being used, where it should be "cbf". But that doesn't help the problem here, so it's moot. I just wanted to point it out for anyone trying to actually run the test case.
Hide
Permalink
Werner Guttmann added a comment -

Thanks, Keith, for the explanations. Let me see over the next few days whether I can get my head around this .... and thanks for pointing out the namespace inconsistencies ....;-.).

Show
Werner Guttmann added a comment - Thanks, Keith, for the explanations. Let me see over the next few days whether I can get my head around this .... and thanks for pointing out the namespace inconsistencies ....;-.).
Hide
Permalink
Werner Guttmann added a comment -

Keith, what's the best way to obtain the XMLBindingComponent for the parent of a SimpleType ? If there's an easy answer, I think I can provide a patch within a fewe minutes ... .

Show
Werner Guttmann added a comment - Keith, what's the best way to obtain the XMLBindingComponent for the parent of a SimpleType ? If there's an easy answer, I think I can provide a patch within a fewe minutes ... .
Hide
Permalink
Werner Guttmann added a comment -

Keith, any idea on how to go about my question/problem ?

Show
Werner Guttmann added a comment - Keith, any idea on how to go about my question/problem ?
Hide
Permalink
Werner Guttmann added a comment -

Just to let you know that this issue is addressed as part of CASTOR-1445.

Show
Werner Guttmann added a comment - Just to let you know that this issue is addressed as part of CASTOR-1445 .

People

  • Assignee:
    Werner Guttmann
    Reporter:
    Vinaya
Vote (1)
Watch (2)

Dates

  • Created:
    Updated:
    Resolved: