AW: [sdo] Proposal for Static SDOs

["Barack, Ron" <ron.barack@sap.com>]

Hi Frank,

Thanks for bringing this up, since I somehow left it up of my "main points" presentation.

There may need to be wording changes in the proposal, but my intention was:

SDO URI -> Java Package:  Use JAX-B name-mangling.
Java Package -> SDO URI:  uri = package.getName().

The disadvantage of the first rule is that when generating POJOs using JAXB and static SDOs from the same XSD, the default behavior will be to overwrite the classes.  On the other hand, it save us from having to come up with a new algorithm.  

I looked through the JAXB spec and I didn't find any behavior at all for describing the other direction.  I don't like the idea of using the "" namespace.  An important use case for us is going from unannotated classes to a reasonable SDO model.  Using the "" package would mean that the class names have to be unique (over all packages), which I think is an unreasonable restriction.

The problem with the rule in my proposal is that the URI is not a legal URI in XML.  This didn't really bother me, since it's still a legal SDO URI.  The WebBeans approach sounds like a reasonable improvement on the proposal I sent out.


Ron


-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Frank Budinsky [mailto:frankb@ca.ibm.com] 
Gesendet: Dienstag, 10. Februar 2009 21:02
An: sdo@lists.oasis-open.org
Betreff: Re: [sdo] Proposal for Static SDOs

Hi Ron,

Regarding the package name to/from URI mapping, your document says they're 
the same value, but that won't work. For example: "http://a/b/c"; is not a 
valid package name. I thought we were thinking about using the JAX-B 
mapping rule for URI -> package name. In the other direction (package name 
-> URI) JAX-B just uses "" for the URI by default (if there is no 
annotation). Is that what we want to do as well? I heard that the WebBeans 
spec is proposing a Java to XML namespace mapping of the following form: "
urn:java:<package qualified Java Class>". Seems kind of strange, but maybe 
it's a good idea to make SDO3 and WebBeans behave in the same way.

Frank




"Barack, Ron" <ron.barack@sap.com> 
02/09/2009 06:52 AM

To
<sdo@lists.oasis-open.org>
cc

Subject
[sdo] Proposal for Static SDOs






<<Proposal for Static SDOs.doc>> <<Static SDO.ppt>> 
Hi Everyone, 
Here is the proposed wording for Chapter 3 of the Java Spec, and a PPT 
describing what I think are the highlights and main discussion points of 
the proposal.  Comments of course welcome.  Hopefully, everyone will have 
time to review this before next weeks virtual F2F.

Ron [attachment "Proposal for Static SDOs.doc" deleted by Frank 
Budinsky/Toronto/IBM] [attachment "Static SDO.ppt" deleted by Frank 
Budinsky/Toronto/IBM] 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php 


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php