Back to the issue at hand ;-)
So. Is my understanding correct that we would have one hand-written
webbeans.xsd somewhere that defines that a beanType can have children
that are constructor parameters, methods and fields and they have
corresponding methodType, fieldType etc that describe them and then
the schema.xsd:s which are generated dynamically just describe the
structure of the classes and refer to wb:beanType, wb:fieldType,
wb:methodType etc?
On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 5:59 PM, Jason T. Greene
<jason.greene(a)redhat.com> wrote:
Jason T. Greene wrote:
>
> <xs:element name="bindingElement" type="bindingType"/>
>
> <xs:complexType name="classType">
> <xs:sequence>
> <xs:element ref="bindingElement"/>
> </xs:sequence>
> </xs:complexType>
>
> // in the sales namespace
> <xs:element name="Bar"
substitutionGroup="webbeans:bindingElement"/>
>
> // in the acme namespace
> <xs:element name="Foo" type="classType"/>
>
>
You also want to make bindingElement abstract (abstract=true).
--
Jason T. Greene
JBoss, a division of Red Hat
_______________________________________________
webbeans-dev mailing list
webbeans-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/webbeans-dev
--
---
Nik