Hi Michael,

thanks for the reply. I am quite sure there isn't an error earlier in the
file. The error message provided by both versions of Xerces is the same. The
XML structure has this opening sequence:

<Letters>
        <dataset type="sample" effdate="2002-10-01">
                <channel channeldest="PDF"/>
                <customer>
                        <name>

There are several dataset elements with a complex structure which are all
well formed until later in the XML we have:

                </customer>
        </dataset>
                        <name>

So the opening dataset and customer elements are missing. Xerces reports the
error

The element type "Letters" must be terminated by the matching end-tag
"</Letters>".

which is clearly referring to the root element. Maybe thats why the newer
version stops at the opening tag of the root element, but the well formness
problem is much later in the file.

Thanks,

Chris


Michael Glavassevich wrote:
> 
> Hi Chris,
> 
> Xerces will report SAX events up until the point it detects a 
> well-formedness error. Are you sure there isn't a problem earlier in the 
> document which wasn't being detected with the older (buggy) version of 
> Xerces?
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> Michael Glavassevich
> XML Parser Development
> IBM Toronto Lab
> E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> cbowditch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 02/06/2007 08:56:38 AM:
> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> we are using Xerces in an application to parse very large XML files 
> using
>> SAX. In an older version of our application we are using xerces 2.2.1. 
> If
>> there is an error in the XML being parsed, i.e. not well formed, then 
> Xerces
>> generates SAX Events up to the point of the error. However in a newer
>> version of the our Application we use Xerces 2.7.1 and that throws an
>> exception before generating any SAX events if there is an error a few Kb
>> inside the XML.
>> 
>> Is this behaviour change to be expected? Is there anyway I can control 
> if
>> Xerces parses up to the point of invalid XML or not? I looked in the 
> list of
>> features and properties but couldn't see anything that would help.
>> continue-on-fatal-error isnt quite what I'm looking for.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> 
>> Chris
>> -- 
>> View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Well-Formed-
>> Checking-tf3180736.html#a8826373
>> Sent from the Xerces - J - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>> 
>> 
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 
> 

-- 
View this message in context: 
http://www.nabble.com/Well-Formed-Checking-tf3180736.html#a8849083
Sent from the Xerces - J - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


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

Reply via email to