Bugs item #800923, was opened at 2003-09-05 17:58
Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by Item Submitter
You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=376685&aid=800923&group_id=22866

Category: JBossServer
Group: v3.2
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Mark Lassau (mlassau)
Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody)
Summary: xml config files not valid

Initial Comment:
I have tried to use Apache Xerces' DOMParser to parse

some xml config files in JBoss v3.2.1

(eg jboss-3.2.1\server\default\conf\jboss-service.xml)

These all have a doctype that looks only like:

<!DOCTYPE server>



The DOMParser will not give me any children of the root

element - <server>. If I remove the doctype

declaration, then it parses fine.



According to Michael Glavassevich at apache.org these

documents are well-formed but not valid.

See below for snippet of posting to xerces-j-user

mailing list:







Your document is well formed, but isn't valid.



<!DOCTYPE server> just means that a valid root element

for the document is

'server', but you still need to declare 'server' in

your DTD, as well as

the rest of your elements and attributes (even if you

declare 'server' as

<!ELEMENT server ANY>), in order for your document to

be valid.



Hope that helps.



On Fri, 5 Sep 2003, Mark Lassau wrote:



>> Is the following valid xml?

>>

>> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

>> <!DOCTYPE server>

>> <server>

>>   <classpath codebase="lib" archives="*"/>

>> </server>





----------------------------------------------------------------------

You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=376685&aid=800923&group_id=22866


-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
_______________________________________________
JBoss-Development mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development

Reply via email to