Thanks for your response. I'd prefer to avoid an implementation dependency,
which is why the duplication (rework) was mentioned.
On 7/31/07, Kohsuke Kawaguchi <Kohsuke.Kawaguchi_at_sun.com> wrote:
>
> Shelley wrote:
> > My content tree contains an @XmlElement of type Object, which should be
> > mapped to the XML type, anySimpleType.
> >
> > @XmlElement(required = true, nillable = true)
> > protected Object value;
> >
> > During marshalling, if an unknown Java type object has been set (unknown
> per
> > the "Default Data Type Bindings"), a MarshalException will be thrown.
> (ie:
> > MarshalException "Caused by: javax.xml.bind.JAXBException: class <
> > java.util.ArrayList> nor any of its super class is known to this
> context.")
> >
> > I would like to prevent this exception from occurring, and allow any
> Object
> > type to be set and successfully marshalled/unmarshalled. If the type is
> not
> > a default data type, the value should be converted to a String (either
> > object.toString() or some custom logic to determine the appropriate
> String
> > based on the class), and the XML type should be xs:anySimpleType.
> >
> > For example, for the following content tree:
> > List<String> list = new ArrayList<String>(2);
> > list.add("a");
> > list.add("b");
> > myXmlType.setValue(list);
> > the XML output should be as follows:
> > <value xmlns:xsi=" http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"
> xmlns:xs="
> > http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" xsi:type="xs:anySimpleType">[a,
> b]</value>
> >
> > A possible solution would involve creation of a custom
> XmlJavaTypeAdapter to
> > customize this binding, however, this would currently require a great
> deal
> > of rework of the existing logic which parses through the known data
> types
> > (ex: com.sun.xml.bind.v2.runtime.JAXBContextImpl.getBeanInfo()). The
> > DatatypeConverter contains print and parse methods for anySimpleType,
> but
> > these methods only use String parameters and return values (not
> Objects).
> >
> > Any suggestions on how to accomplish this customized binding between
> Object
> > and anySimpleType would be appreciated. Thank you!
>
> You'd have to write an adapter for sure, but I guess the question you
> have really more like "how can I know if the given type is bindable by
> JAXB already, so that I can decide whether I need to do toString() or
> not"?
>
> And the answer is to use JAXBContextImpl.getBeanInfo(), as you found
> out. I'm not sure what you mean by "great deal of rework", as it just
> involves one method invocation. There's a legitimate concern for relying
> on the implementation detail method, yes.
>
> --
> Kohsuke Kawaguchi
> Sun Microsystems kohsuke.kawaguchi_at_sun.com
>
>