Michael, Dan Kulp over at CXF made a patch based on your suggestion: http://pastie.org/614117.txt will go into the nightly snapshots and then into the next release of CXF.
Thanks again, Craig. On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 10:28 PM, Michael Glavassevich <mrgla...@ca.ibm.com> wrote: > Craig, > > Craig Tataryn <crai...@tataryn.net> wrote on 09/10/2009 11:09:05 PM: > > <snip/> > >> Hmm, I see. I can kind of understand why they wouldn't be setting >> the SystemID as they might not know how to gleam what it should be >> (in all cases). When I'm in front of the code tomorrow I'll see if >> I can deduce what it should be within the context of that call. >> Otherwise, is there a way in the WSDL I can set the SystemId? Or >> perhaps you are saying that even if the SystemId were present in the >> WSDL CXF wouldn't be respecting it? > > What I'm saying is that CXF's usage of JAXP here is not correct. A system ID > is required for resolution of relative URIs and schema documents can contain > relative URIs in xs:include / xs:import / xs:redefine. How this base URI is > specified and flows through CXF is totally up to them (though > Document.documentURI [1] is a natural place to store it) but they need to > provide it at the call site where they're loading the schema by calling > setSystemId() on the Source object they pass into SchemaFactory.newSchema(). > >> Thanks Michael. >> >> Craig. > > Thanks. > > [1] > http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-DOM-Level-3-Core-20040407/core.html#Document3-documentURI > > Michael Glavassevich > XML Parser Development > IBM Toronto Lab > E-mail: mrgla...@ca.ibm.com > E-mail: mrgla...@apache.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: j-users-unsubscr...@xerces.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: j-users-h...@xerces.apache.org
