I am generating Java classes from WSDL. It has several conflicts, so I use a binding file.
I will show 2 cases. My question is why the second suffix approach does not work.
Working example:
<jaxb:bindings schemaLocation="../wsdl/WebServiceSVC-init.wsdl#types?schema18">
<jaxb:bindings node="//xs:element[@name='MyConfictElement']">
<jaxb:class name="MyConfictElement_Element"/>
</jaxb:bindings>
</jaxb:bindings>
It resolves this conflict, but in this case I need to go through several conflicts and resolve them, like this manual one by one.
The second does not work, but prefers the case for me - it automatically adds a suffix, as in the previous case:
<jaxb:bindings schemaLocation="../wsdl/WebServiceSVC-init.wsdl#types?schema18">
<jaxb:schemaBindings>
<jaxb:package name="com.kirillch.classes.Egrul"/>
<jaxb:nameXmlTransform>
<jaxb:elementName suffix="_Element"/>
</jaxb:nameXmlTransform>
</jaxb:schemaBindings>
</jaxb:bindings>
If I use this case, conflicts will not be resolved.
source
share