> Thanks for all the input. Things are becoming clearer but I still don't
> fully understand the argument. You seem to be implying that it is the
> fault of the XML Schema specification as to why the Java packaging model
> I require is not possible. Could you give me an example (in simple
> terms) as why this is the case? I still don't see why the Schema
> specification influences the Java packaging model (surely they should be
> de-coupled).
See my earlier reply to Malachi on the same thread.
When the JAXB spec talks about things like "element decls" or "complex
types", these concepts have to be defined. Those definitions are called
"abstract schema components" and their definitions are given in the XML
Schema spec.
For JAXB to put two elements into different packages based on the file where
its definition came from, we need the abstract schema components to
carry such information. Since the input to JAXB is abstract schema
components, if it doesn't carry such information, we have no way of
doing it.
regards,
--
Kohsuke Kawaguchi
Sun Microsystems kohsuke.kawaguchi_at_sun.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe_at_jaxb.dev.java.net
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help_at_jaxb.dev.java.net