Gary Gregory wrote:
> I did submit a bug I cannot give you a URL as the system did not give me
> a bug id after submission.
>
Thanks, we saw the report internally.
> The bug system is not the most friendly, to say the least. It certainly
> does not make it easy on you and I can't say that I plan on using it,
> compared to bugzilla as implemented for example on www.eclipse.org, it
> is a pain.
>
The bug reporting system on java.net seems to be much better than the
bugparade, so I guess we have something to look forward to...
--Ryan
> Gary
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ryan Shoemaker - JavaSoft East [mailto:Ryan.Shoemaker_at_Sun.COM]
> Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003 05:47
> To: JAXB-INTEREST_at_JAVA.SUN.COM
> Subject: Re: XSD annotation/documentation to Javadoc request
>
> Gary Gregory wrote:
>
> > Thanks as always for your prompt feedback and a great product.
> >
>
> Thanks!
>
> >> "As Ed pointed out, you can duplicate the annotation documentation in
> >> javadoc customizations for the time being."
> >
> > Indeed, it's just not _that_ important to us for us to do the extra work
> > and make our bindings file more complicated (not that much more
> > complicated I know). It's a feature that will be nice to get for "free"
> > at some point in the future.
> >
>
> Understood - I just wanted to make sure you (and everyone else on the list)
> knew that there was a workaround.
>
> > Note that the current 1.0.1 Javadoc comment generated is slightly
> > misleading. For example, the following XSD fragment:
> >
> > <xs:attribute name="maxTotalConnections" type="cics:positiveShort"
> > use="optional" default="20">
> >
> > Yields the following Javadoc fragment:
> >
> > <attribute name="maxTotalConnections"
> >
> type="{http://www.seagullsw.com/appinterface/server/backend/cics/bind}positiveShort"
>
> > />
> >
> > Note that nothing is said of:
> >
> > use="optional" default="20"
> >
> > Which are very important data points! (and std XSD attributes).
> >
>
> Thanks for the report. Would you be willing to file a bug on this:
>
> http://developer.java.sun.com/developer/bugParade/index.jshtml
>
> Follow the "submit a new bug" link at the bottom of the page.
>
> Thanks,
>
> --Ryan
>
> > Thanks,
> > Gary
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Ryan Shoemaker - JavaSoft East [mailto:Ryan.Shoemaker_at_Sun.COM]
> > Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2003 08:07
> > To: JAXB-INTEREST_at_JAVA.SUN.COM
> > Subject: Re: XSD annotation/documentation to Javadoc request
> >
> >
> > Gary Gregory wrote:
> >
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > It would be quite helpful if XSD annotations would show up as Javadoc
> > > comments.
> > >
> >
> > Agreed. The specification left some wiggle room to not implement it:
> >
> > "Class-level javadoc is a combination of a documentation annotation from
> > the schema component and/or javadoc specified within customization."
> >
> > There are similar statements all over the spec for other schema
> > components. It simply isn't as important as supporting more of the W3C
> > XML Schema spec, so we haven't implemented it yet, but it's still on our
> > list of things to implement - we'll make sure to consider it more
> > seriously now that we've gotten feedback that people are interested
> in it.
> >
> > As Ed pointed out, you can duplicate the annotation documention in
> > javadoc customizations for the time being.
> >
> > Thanks for the feedback...
> >
> > --Ryan
> >
> > > For example, the following:
> > >
> > > <xs:attribute name="maxConnectionsPerHost"
> > > type="cics:positiveShort" use="optional" default="2">
> > > <xs:annotation>
> > > <xs:documentation>Sets the maximum number of
> > > connections allowed for a given HostConfiguration. Per RFC 2616
> > > section 8.1.4, this value defaults to 2.</xs:documentation>
> > >
> > > </xs:annotation>
> > > </xs:attribute>
> > >
> > > Would show up as:
> > >
> > > /**
> > > * Sets the maximum number of connections allowed for a
> > > * given HostConfiguration. Per RFC 2616 section 8.1.4,
> > > * this value defaults to 2.
> > > */
> > >
> > > I've formatted this so it fits nicely in an email message but I think
> > > the format should not be changed from what is in the
> > > annotation/documentation element.
> > >
> > > The reason I bring this is up is that some tools like XMLSpy support
> > > this scheme to document XSDs, which is how we document our XSDs.
> > >
> > > Gary
> > >
> >
>