Misc schema stuff

[brian.stansberry]

Thread for misc back-and-forth about the domain schema.

Alexey Loubyansky wrote:

Brief update on what I've committed today:
- added missing types and elements to reflect new things in the xml;
- adjusted some existing element and attribute names in the XML and XSD to make them consistent;
- moved uncommon (domain.xml and host.xml specific) type declarations from the common schema to the schemas they are (exclusively) used in;
- added XML validation testcase.

In the host.xml example a few changes I'd like to mention:

* namespace "urn:jboss:host:1.0" became "urn:jboss:domain:1.0"

* listed system property (under jvm element) should have a value specified?&#8232;             <system-properties>&#8232;-                <property name="foo"/>&#8232;+                <property name="foo" value="bar"/>&#8232;             </system-properties>

* jvm environment-properties changed to jvm-properties according to the existing schema

Jason set up a new repo on github to use as the master instead of David's: http://github.com/jbossas/jboss-as. I pushed these changes there. There's still discussion around the system property and jvm stuff, but for sure the example should match the schema.

From host XSD, named-interfacesType is not used anywhere. named-interfaceType is used only as the base for specified-interfaceType.

That was messed up by me. The intent was at the domain level named-interfacesType would be used and there interface-criteriaGroup would not be required. At the host or server level interface-criteriaGroup is required. I took another shot at this and pushed it to http://github.com/bstansberry/jboss-as schema-dev branch.

I've commented out and added a TODO comment for cluster configuration in jboss-domain-example.xml since there is nothing close in the XSD at the moment. If that's a more or less complete example of the configuration I could add this to the schema.

Thanks. It's not ready to be converted to XSD yet.

And I would probably move the XML examples out of 'schema' to a separate  directory.

Sounds good.

[dmlloyd]

Can we choose between camelCase and hyphenated-names?  And by choose I mean, someone go in and pick one or the other and we'll all follow suit.

[brian.stansberry]

I think the camel case is mostly in type and group definitions: fooType, barGroup. That seemed to be consistent throughout.

I suppose the mixed ones like foo-barType are odd.

[aloubyansky]

I'm not gonna argue on naming conventions. If somebody has a strong preference, I'll use it.

Currently, elements are hyphenated and type names are element-name + 'Type'. AFAICS, this is consistent with other JEE standard schemas.

[brian.stansberry]

Let's keep things as they are. It all felt familiar to me when I first looked at it, probably because it follows the JEE schema naming conventions. I personally like the +Type convention as it makes it easy to differentiate those.