Re: [Dev] Developer Studio changes ordering of XML attributes

Thanks Viraj and Kavith. Thanks, Rajeevan On Sat, Jun 11, 2016 at 12:41 AM, Kavith Lokuhewage wrote: > Hi, > > On an additional note, this is a major drawback that we have with several > components in DevStudio. While trying to improve artfact.xml and pom.xml > handling

Re: [Dev] Developer Studio changes ordering of XML attributes

Hi, On an additional note, this is a major drawback that we have with several components in DevStudio. While trying to improve artfact.xml and pom.xml handling components, we recently came across [1], which is based on the concept of non extractive parsing[2]. Unfortunately this is licensed with

Re: [Dev] Developer Studio changes ordering of XML attributes

Hi Rajeevan, I think we have two issues. 1. The way attributes are ordered in generated source is not readable. Eg: Property name should come before the Property expression. This is a valid requirement and we will try to fix in a future release. (not in the next immediate release). We will need

Re: [Dev] Developer Studio changes ordering of XML attributes

Thanks Nuwan and Susinda for your prompt responses. I would say it is a nice to have thing rather not a blocker for Developer Studio. Here the issue is user can not keep desired attribute order when using Graphical Editor(when switching between Design and Source view it is getting overwritten).

Re: [Dev] Developer Studio changes ordering of XML attributes

Hi Rajeevan I have google a bit on this issue in general. It seems like normal DOM does not care about the attribute order. Also I believe xml schemas would also not care about the order[1]. We have to test this whether we have any support in axiom level. As this requirement is valid in terms of

Re: [Dev] Developer Studio changes ordering of XML attributes

Hi Rajeevan, This behavior happens when we try to format the configuration. We use javax DocumentBuilder to parse and format and it does not care about the attribute order, since it's meaningless as far as the standard is concerned. This for sure we can fix by manually editing the source