Why not split the schema then?
On Jun 27, 2006, at 9:37 PM, Dmitri Colebatch wrote:
> Perhaps I wasn't clear. The currently functionality allows for _all_
> of the generated classes to have a common superclass (or interface).
>
> The functionality I am after is to be able to specify this on a node
> by node basis.
>
> cheers
> dim
>
> On 6/28/06, Kasia Trapszo <kasia_at_trapszo.com> wrote:
>> It's a common requirement:
>>
>> http://java.sun.com/webservices/docs/2.0/jaxb/
>> vendorCustomizations.html#superclass
>>
>> On Jun 27, 2006, at 9:28 PM, Dmitri Colebatch wrote:
>>
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > I'm assuming this isn't possible, but am wondering why not. I
>> would
>> > like some of my generated classes to have a common super interface.
>> > Whilst technically speaking it might make more sense to do through
>> > through schema inheritance, in this case I don't have that level on
>> > control.
>> >
>> > Does anyone else have this need? Is it actually possible?
>> >
>> > cheers
>> > dim
>> >
>> >
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe_at_jaxb.dev.java.net
>> > For additional commands, e-mail: users-help_at_jaxb.dev.java.net
>> >
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe_at_jaxb.dev.java.net
>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help_at_jaxb.dev.java.net
>>
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe_at_jaxb.dev.java.net
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help_at_jaxb.dev.java.net
>