You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I'm not exactly sure if this is a feature request or a question, but I am not sure of a better place to ask.
I am using the Simplify Plugin and it works outstanding. What I see is that the plugin aggresively simplifies all repeatable choices. Generally this is perfect; however I do have a situation where the order of elements within a choice does matter in my schema. But I have been unable to figure out how to make Simplify Plugin NOT do the simplification in just that case.
Is that possible currently? Or is that something for which you'd consider adding support?
Thanks!
If it helps, the fragment of the schema is this complex-type:
First, thanks for using jaxb2-basics.
It's now part of jaxb-tools project, which was former repository of maven-jaxb2-plugin. See Readme for new location.
To answer your question, you should give a try to the ignored special binding with the simplify prefix bound to simplify namespace : see excluding properties section in wiki.
If you got any more question, feel free to ask (you'll also get more support from new repository location).
I'm not exactly sure if this is a feature request or a question, but I am not sure of a better place to ask.
I am using the Simplify Plugin and it works outstanding. What I see is that the plugin aggresively simplifies all repeatable choices. Generally this is perfect; however I do have a situation where the order of elements within a choice does matter in my schema. But I have been unable to figure out how to make Simplify Plugin NOT do the simplification in just that case.
Is that possible currently? Or is that something for which you'd consider adding support?
Thanks!
If it helps, the fragment of the schema is this complex-type:
Currently, with Simplify Plugin, XJC produces:
In this case, the order is important so I really need the heterogeneous form:
Thanks again!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: