Have you guys read http://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/manual/configuration.html#ConfigurationSyntax? In particular the "strict" and "schema" attributes.
IMO, using a schema for the concise format would be very impractical. Personally, I'm not sure it makes sense even for the strict format as it would have to "know" about the attributes the various Appenders and Filters can accept to be of any value. The schema would also have to be updated as new components are added. Ralph On Sep 26, 2012, at 6:55 AM, Paul Benedict wrote: > It's true that validation can add a bit of grogginess to the system. However, > that can simply be controlled by a Java system property if necessary. I don't > think we need the validation at runtime, however, having an XSD at design > time is a definite. I need all the help I can get inside Eclipse :-) > > If not already, we should provide an XSD in the log4j api or impl jar. > > Paul > > On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 8:07 AM, Ivan Habunek <ivan.habu...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 26 September 2012 13:39, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Incorrect! > > I stand corrected. Still, it's probably not wise to have automatic XSD > validation before configuration because of performance issues. But it > would be nice to have a method which users can call and validate their > XML configuration files manually. > > Regards, > Ivan > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org > >
