DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT <http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41514>. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41514 ------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-02-02 03:55 ------- Created an attachment (id=19497) --> (http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19497&action=view) main patch file (In reply to comment #3) > The patch is fairly large and seems to address more than only validation of the > configuration file. Can you give a summary? The patch seems quite large because I have added a new suite of configuration unit tests for the fix (these are contained in the attached zip file). A summary of the changes is given below. > I am against this exception being thrown if I do not use the font arial at all: > > [ERROR] FOP - Exception > <org.apache.avalon.framework.configuration.ConfigurationException: Failed to > resolve font metric-url > 'arial.xml'>org.apache.avalon.framework.configuration.ConfigurationException: > Failed to resolve font metric-url 'arial.xml' In order for this to be the case, the user configuration would have to be (re-)read/parsed at the runtime of the rendering operation in order that it would be able to know if a particular font is being used in the given FO file. This would be an inefficient way of doing things and would require some structural changes. > I am also against combining strict validation of the FO file and the user > configuration; they are two different things. I would appreciate a separate > option 'validate-configuration', which checks every entry in the configuration file. > I did raise this as a question on forum and I remember you responded to it. http://www.nabble.com/Bad-FOP-configurations-tf3064300.html#a8522251 Chris Bowditch suggested that it be combined with "strict-validation". I can see your argument for this and this was my original idea but I can also see Chris' argument too. On balance I have decided to go with your suggestion and make it separate a separate configuration option so as to not cause any confusion. I have introduced a new configuration variable called "strict-configuration". I haven't called it "validate-configuration" because validation should always occur, its how the resulting error is handled that is the important thing (see Andreas' comments from the thread). If "strict-configuration" == "false" then FOP will simply log the error and continue to parse the user configuration. If "strict-configuration" == "true" then FOP will immediately raise an exception and will not continue trying to configure itself. I have attached a new patch file containing these changes (this includes related documentation changes). This new patch file superceeds the previous one. Kind regards, Adrian Cumiskey. -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
