Hi Mukul. I will, in due course, be posting an "offifical" reply to this comment but, until then, I would just make two observations: 1) Some months ago, you eventually managed to replicate the behaviour that I reported, with some Xerces-J configuration. Am I supposed to understand your present comment to mean that the behaviour has been overtaken by updates to the code base to fix other problems and no longer occurs? 2) How would an ordinary mortal (like me) use the updated code base for Xerces-J, both from the point of view of accessing the code and from the one of execution environment>
Many thanks and Happy New Year. John. > On 27 December 2021 at 12:41 "Mukul Gandhi (Jira)" > <xerces-j-...@xml.apache.org> wrote: > > > > [ > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/XERCESJ-1726?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17465739#comment-17465739 > ] > > Mukul Gandhi edited comment on XERCESJ-1726 at 12/27/21, 12:40 PM: > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Over the past few days, there were quite few, improvements committed to svn > related to XercesJ xpath 2.0 processor's regex engine. One should fetch and > build the latest codebase from svn, till next XercesJ release is made. > > With the latest codebase from svn, when I validate test1.xml with test.xsd > with lines 40 and 195 of the file test1.xml commented, I get no validation > errors. > > After continued debugging, I've come to conclusion that, XercesJ doesn't have > bug related to this issue, and the problem reported is most likely unique to > the XML document test instance that's provided. > > > was (Author: mukul_gandhi): > Over the past few days, there were quite few, improvements committed to svn > related to XercesJ xpath 2.0 processor's regex engine. One should fetch and > build the latest codebase from svn, till next XercesJ release is made. > > With the latest codebase from svn, when I validate test1.xml with test.xsd > with lines 40 and 195 commented, I get no validation errors. > > After continued debugging, I've come to conclusion that, XercesJ doesn't have > bug related to this issue, and the problem reported is unique to the XML > document test instance that's provided. > > > Possible Bug: Xerces 2.12.1 for XML Validation with XSD 1.1 Schema under > > Java > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > Key: XERCESJ-1726 > > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/XERCESJ-1726 > > Project: Xerces2-J > > Issue Type: Bug > > Components: Samples > > Affects Versions: 2.12.1 > > Environment: Windows 7 > > Java 1.8.0_261 > > Xerces-J 2.12.1 > > Reporter: J Morris > > Assignee: Mukul Gandhi > > Priority: Major > > Labels: test > > Attachments: testX.zip, test_cases_ mukul.zip > > > > Original Estimate: 72h > > Remaining Estimate: 72h > > > > I have recently been trying to validate the XML file *test1.xml* with a > > schema *test.xsd* containing *assert*/*assertion* constructs, using the > > sample program *jaxp.SourceValidator*. > > Unexpectedly, the result was several reported errors in what appeared to be > > syntactically correct and valid XML lines (*test1.xml*: 9 errors). > > After significant experimentation, it appeared that these errors were > > occurring at line numbers which the validation found troublesome. Inserting > > an extra line at one of the troublesome line numbers made the previously > > erroneous line (now *not* appearing at a troublesome line number) pass > > validation. On the other hand, the newly inserted line (occupying the > > troublesome line number) would fail validation. > > I tentatively interpreted this as meaning that *the validation errors were > > not real* and began to try to develop a test-case, as similar as possible > > to *test1.xml*, but which passed validation. The result was *test2.xml*, > > which was generated from *test1.xml* by inserting XML comment lines at each > > of the troublesome line numbers, thereby displacing the previously > > erroneous lines to non-trooublesome line numbers. Since XML comment lines > > do not require validation, this file passed validation for me (*test2.xml*: > > 0 errors). > > I then contacted Mukul Gandhi and he re-ran my validations *but came to a > > different result*. He saw errors in both XML files (*test1.xml*: 9 errors; > > *test2.xml*: 18 errors). Despite our joint efforts to achieve convergence > > between our respective validation runs, we have not so far succeeded. > > Mukul did point out a couple of things: > > 1) The way that I was using the "matches" function in the *assert* > > constructs. His experience suggested that this was unreliable. However, I > > was not certain whether this would have led to the type of behaviour that I > > was seeing (apparent troublesome line numbers). > > 2) He found that certain characters (probably the two accented French > > characters) in my XML files were not supported in the default XML encoding > > scheme, UTF-8. However, for me, no errors were reported for those by the > > validation program *jaxp.SourceValidator*. > > I would be very gratefull foe some help in getting to the bottom of this > > (both the original behaviour and the discrepancies with Mukul's validation > > runs). > > > > -- > This message was sent by Atlassian Jira > (v8.20.1#820001) --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: j-dev-unsubscr...@xerces.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: j-dev-h...@xerces.apache.org
