I completely agree. It was 'plan a' in my thoughts, and then I stumbled onto that RelaxNG 'plan b'.
I'd like to at least observe the errors from the two different validators before I decide, and to do that I have to persuade mvn to actually put msv into the classpath. > -----Original Message----- > From: Daniel Kulp [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2007 5:34 PM > To: [email protected] > Cc: Benson Margulies > Subject: Re: MSV library > > > I have no problem including the MSV library, but I have to wonder if it > would make just as much sense to just "dom parse" using the parsers and > validators built into the JDK and the use a DOM base Stax reader to > wrapper that to read into the stuff Aegis needs. It would be very > slightly slower, but if this is just for the "startup" config files, I > think that's acceptable. It's a one time hit. And those files I > THINK are fairly small (correct me if I'm wrong, I'm not an aegis > expert) so it the hit may be unperceivable. > > Thoughts? > Dan > > > On Thursday 20 September 2007, Benson Margulies wrote: > > I had an idea for how to get Aegis validation: Woodstox has RelaxNG > > validation, and Sun has a converted from XSD to RNG. > > > > > > > > Only one little problem: Woodstox expects you to add the MSV library > > to your app to get RNG validation. > > > > > > > > MSV comes with a ASF 1.0 license, dated 2000. > > > > > > > > Anyone have an appetite for this idea, or is this just too much > > nonsense just to get more diagnosis of badly-typed .aegis.xml files? > > > > -- > J. Daniel Kulp > Principal Engineer > IONA > P: 781-902-8727 C: 508-380-7194 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.dankulp.com/blog
