Check if there is a difference in referencing a schema in both your processdefinitions. If you do not have a schema reference in it, validation against a schema is not done and it will work (still true in 3.2)
ok, thats a sound workaround, though one loses schema validation completely.
I still consider this a bug in the schema declaration.
sorry, in the schema definition (not declaration)
hmm.... bug/feature request... I'm not sure what the intention was... Could be that it worked by accident or that it works because of some seam thing. Extending the schema to allow everything (that is what you ask) makes schema validation of this field impossible. Since it is a limited list, I and you have to turn of schema validation to get it to work at all, I think it is an unintended feature.
I'll check the source to see if there are any testcases that come close to what you do.
ok.. just did... there are no tests in this direction, so I think you were 'lucky'.
So, does this mean, that this 'feature' will vanish or is 'unsupportred' ? That would be really a pitty, since using a customer instantiator for creating your delegation classes allows to perform some quite nice things.
E.g. I use it to chain the ActionHandler to a Spring container so that it gets injected all service it declares (autowire by type). Or you can use it explicitely.
You might want have a look at http://opensource.atlassian.com/projects/spring/browse/MOD-297
how powerful this feature is.
Well, at least I was lucky that time ;-) And I really thought, I've read this somewhere in the documentation ...
Thanks very much for your response, this was my first post (out of ~5) to which I got some response at all.
Neither.... ;-)... well... at least not when you file a jira issue for it. It will then either be rejected, or accepted but not without anyone knowing it
Not sure about your other posts. I'm rather picky (many duplicates etc... or they were 'RTFM's ;-))
mail the links to these topics to me and I'll check.