Stefan Bodewig wrote: > > >>>>> "SM" == Stefano Mazzocchi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > SM> Stefan Bodewig wrote > > >> While I think full validation is of low priority checking whether > >> buld.xml is at least well formed and providing better error > >> messages would be helpfull. > > SM> +1, this is already in the todo list > > Maybe Xerces would provide more usable error messages and thus just > switching the parser would help? I know you are involved with > xml.apache.org projects so maybe you could comment on this?
yes, xerces is much better at error codes than projectX, for what I've seen, but maybe it's a problem with Ant that doesn't print that information passed on the SAXExceptions... > >> It took me a rather long time to see that the parser shipped with > >> Ant chokes on comments inside elements > >> > >> nsgmls didn't complain at all > > SM> nsgmls is not exactly the bext xml editor available... > > OK, http://www.w3.org/TR/1998/REC-xml-19980210#sec-comments quite > clearly says nsgmls was wrong. > > It (nsgmls) was the one I had on my disk as I'm using DocBook - the > SGML version - to document my code (design documents, user manuals all > the boring stuff you're forced to do). > > SM> unfortunately, it's one of the best you get for free > > Other recommendations? The best XML editor around is, by far, XMetaL (www.xmetal.com)... but way too expensive for what gives you, IMVHO. -- Stefano Mazzocchi One must still have chaos in oneself to be able to give birth to a dancing star. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Friedrich Nietzsche -------------------------------------------------------------------- Missed us in Orlando? Make it up with ApacheCON Europe in London! ------------------------- http://ApacheCon.Com ---------------------
