https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-5887

Martin Grigorov
Wicket Training and Consulting
https://twitter.com/mtgrigorov

On Sun, Apr 19, 2015 at 3:11 PM, Martin Grigorov <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Thanks John!
> Indeed this is the problem.
> http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/SCHEMA/xhtml-basic-form-1.xsd defines the
> original with '.'
>
> Martin Grigorov
> Wicket Training and Consulting
> https://twitter.com/mtgrigorov
>
> On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 4:54 PM, John Sarman <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> It complies fine if you change line 86 from
>> <attributeGroup ref="xhtml.label:attlist"/>
>> to
>> <attributeGroup ref="xhtml.label.attlist"/>
>>
>> It looks like a simple typo.   I haven't checked it any further.
>>
>> --
>> John
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 6:56 AM, Sven Meier <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > I see the same and other problems when parsing the xsd with different
>> > validators :/.
>> >
>> > My knowledge of XSDs is limited and the error messages are rather
>> cryptic.
>> >
>> > Regards
>> > Sven
>> >
>> > Am 15.04.2015 um 16:10 schrieb Sebastien:
>> >
>> >> Hi devs,
>> >>
>> >> My Eclipse is complaining about wicket.xsd.
>> >>
>> >> https://github.com/apache/wicket/blob/master/wicket-
>> >> core/src/main/resources/META-INF/wicket.xsd#L86
>> >>
>> >> Multiple annotations found at this line:
>> >>      - s4s-att-must-appear: Attribute 'ref' must appear in element
>> >> 'attributeGroup (local)'.
>> >>      - s4s-elt-must-match.1: The content of 'xhtml.label.attlist' must
>> >> match
>> >> (annotation?,
>> >>       ((attribute | attributeGroup)*, anyAttribute?)). A problem was
>> found
>> >> starting at: attributeGroup.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> https://github.com/apache/wicket/blob/master/wicket-
>> >> core/src/main/resources/META-INF/wicket.xsd#L91
>> >>
>> >> src-attribute.4: Attribute 'for' has both a 'type' attribute and an
>> >> anonymous 'simpleType' child. Only one of these is allowed for an
>> >> attribute.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> I am not an xsd expert, but it sounds like to be justified, but am I
>> the
>> >> only one in this case? (I admit I didn't had loaded wicket core
>> since...
>> >> weeks at least ! ;) )
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Thanks & best regards,
>> >> Sebastien.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>>
>
>

Reply via email to