Quoting "Craig R. McClanahan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> David Graham wrote:
> 
> >--- Robert Leland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >  
> >
> >>Currently the Validator PlugIn doesnâEUR^(TM)t validate the XML file. I
> have
> >>updated it to remove the deprecated methods and to validate the XML
> >>files.
> >>
> >>Here is the question: Currently, the validator plugin fails by logging a
> >>message but doesnâEUR^(TM)t take advantage of throwing an exception. I
> believe
> >>it should throw an exception if the validator file is invalid. Are there
> >>any thoughts or objections to throwing an exception, is that too
> >>incompatable  with its current behaviour ?
> >>    
> >>
> >
> >I agree that we should throw the exception.  IMO, it should fail fast and
> >loud at startup if you've misconfigured the validations.
> >  
> >
> I agree with this as well, but of course the same concept should apply 
> to all our other configuration information.  How many of us have 
> mistyped the name of a form bean class, for example (raises hand :-).
> 
> There was an interesting thread on a similar situation with Hivemind on 
> COMMONS-DEV last week, where those developers seem to believe that users 
> shouldn't want such support ever.  I don't agree with that extreme a 
> viewpoint, but it might be nice to make such checks a configuration 
> parameter option (I'd vote for default=true because it probably won't 
> hit startup performance enough to matter for most people).
> 


One issue with this is to make sure the validator DTD is up to date.

The reason I say this is because the DTD appears to be missing the var-jstype 
sub-element of the var element. Even the 1.2.0 version of the DTD on CVS is 
missing this. 

I assume it is a valid element, because even though I can't validate my 
document, the element is used properly when I set it.

Matt Bathje



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to