On Wednesday 02 April 2008 04:54:47 pm Justin Deoliveira wrote: > Generally in cases like these, i will insert a "leniency hack" if we > used to support the behavior, because technically its a regression. But you mean a "configurable" hack? like to enable it from the ui or something? or just a silent hack?
> > I am also usually for being lenient with xml requests in general. But if > there is strong opposition to this I could go either way. Not a strong opposition but a bad smell. Its a regression because we used to be tolerant with the validity of the xml requests we received, or because we used to be dumber at parsing? It smells bad because that request is a valid xml, its just saying the namespace for the "states" type is the request default one, so going through the request and assuming that someone using the request default namespace for the typename is wrong is a double edged knife... Not sure I'm making my concern clear though... Gabriel > > -Justin > > Gabriel Roldán wrote: > > Sorry, hit send accidentally, here it goes again: > > > > Hi, > > > > I'm still debugging for this issue: > > <http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/GEOS-1816> > > > > The thing is, I don't think we should take the request as it is in that > > issue as valid, since it is using an invalid type name. > > > > What I mean is, if you don't want to use the namespace prefix in the > > TypeName element, you should make the request default namespace the one > > of the feature type you want. For instance, the following request do > > work: > > > > <wfs:DescribeFeatureType > > version="1.0.0" > > service="WFS" > > xmlns:wfs="http://www.opengis.net/wfs"; > > xmlns="http://www.openplans.org/topp"; > > xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"; > > xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.opengis.net/wfs > > http://schemas.opengis.net/wfs/1.0.0/WFS-basic.xsd";> > > > > <wfs:TypeName>states</wfs:TypeName> > > > > </wfs:DescribeFeatureType> > > > > Now, the parser is doing a correct parse for the request, and using a > > request body like the one in the issue parses the "states" type name in > > the request default namespace, which is the wfs namespace. > > > > So, do we still want to insert a hack to handle that? > > I would say not, so I'm asking for more votes to take action in one > > direction or the other. > > > > regards, > > > > Gabriel > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. > > It's the best place to buy or sell services for > > just about anything Open Source. > > http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketpl > >ace _______________________________________________ > > Geoserver-devel mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace _______________________________________________ Geoserver-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel
