stevedlawrence commented on issue #811:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/daffodil-vscode/issues/811#issuecomment-1785823832
> Is there currently no way to do a negative test case with the TDMLRunner?
Yes, you can do negative tests by expecting strings that should appear in
diagnostics (see the `<tdml:errors>` tag). A failed compile/parse/unparse
should create a diagnostic (e.g. Schema Definition Error, Parse Error, Unparse
Error) which can be expected instead of an infoset or unparse data. But if you
get a stack trace instead of one of those diagnostics, it usually means there
is a bug in Daffodil, and there is no way in TDML to expect a stack trace
because we never consider bugs expected behavior. Similarly, we don't have a
way to expect an incorrect infoset, because that also is also considered a bug.
TDML files have traditionally been used to describe and test what *should*
happen, and not really describe what *actually* happened.
> Do you have a barebones stub of what an annotation might look like?
It's usually something like:
```xml
<xs:annotation>
<xs:appinfo source="someURI">
Your content goes here
</xs:appinfo>
</xs:annotation>
```
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
