Hi, Ed Merks and I did some work on this (Mostly Ed :-) ). I skimmed the JIRA briefly, and I think this applies here:
See https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=166127 Here's a brief summary: Case1: The element is supposed to be namespaced, but is not. Case2: The element is namespaced, but should not be. Case3: The element is namespaced, but the namespace is different from the namespace that the element is supposed to have per the schema definition. The redesigne of BasicExtendedMetaData supports cases 1 & 2 with a single switch. Hopefully the new design of the BasicExtendedMetaData applies to this TUSCANY-1088 Cheers, - Ole --- "Kevin Williams (JIRA)" <tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org> wrote: > > [ > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-1088?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel > ] > > Kevin Williams updated TUSCANY-1088: > ------------------------------------ > > Description: > I had some off-line discussion with Frank and Yang. > Here is the summary: > > As an improvement to consumability, SDO should > tolerate some malformed XML. XML documents are > often less than well-formed. Rather than failing on > deserialization when a document does not completely > conform to its schema, we should consider making > some assumptions and continuing on. Some competitor > technologies do this today. > > Here's an example. Say we have this schema: > > <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> > <xsd:schema > targetNamespace="http://QuickTest/HelloWorld"; > xmlns:tns="http://QuickTest/HelloWorld"; > xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema"; > elementFormDefault="qualified"> > <xsd:element name="sayHello"> > <xsd:complexType> > <xsd:sequence> > <xsd:element name="input1" nillable="true" > type="xsd:string" /> > </xsd:sequence> > </xsd:complexType> > </xsd:element> > </xsd:schema> > > If we get an xml that looks like this: > > <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> > <tns:sayHello > xmlns:tns="http://QuickTest/HelloWorld"; > > xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"; > xsi:schemaLocation="http://QuickTest/HelloWorld > HelloWorldMessage.xsd "> > <input1>input1</input1> > </tns:sayHello> > > then we will fail validating this since input1 isn't > fully qualified. Here's the xml that would work: > > <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> > <tns:sayHello > xmlns:tns="http://QuickTest/HelloWorld"; > > xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"; > xsi:schemaLocation="http://QuickTest/HelloWorld > HelloWorldMessage.xsd "> > <tns:input1>tns:input1</tns:input1> > </tns:sayHello> > > Frank mentioned 2 potential approaches: > > 1. Read the element in as if it was an open > content property. If you reserialize it would be the > same (still invalid). > 2. If a property with the same name (but different > namespace) exists, then associate it with that. When > you reserialize it will be then be correct. > > The later seems the best approach. > > Yang also contributed the following: > > It's friendly to tolerate if a user forgets to > qualify a local element. There're 3 scenarios may > not have the same elementFormDefault="qualified" > enforcement policy. What do you think? > > 3-1. <tns:sayHello > xmlns:tns="http://QuickTest/HelloWorld";> > <input1>input1</input1> > </tns:sayHello> > > The author may have forgot to qualify "input1" > element, although "input1" may also be a global > element without NameSpace. > It's friendly to tolerate. > > 3-2. <tns:sayHello > xmlns:tns="http://QuickTest/HelloWorld"; > xmlns:onPurpose="differentNameSpace"> > <onPurpose:input1>input1</onPurpose:input1> > </tns:sayHello> > The author has qualified "input1" element; I'm not > confident we should tolerate. > > 3-3. <tns:sayHello > xmlns:tns="http://QuickTest/HelloWorld"; > xmlns="differentNameSpace"> <!-- xmlns= declares all > unqualified elements/attributes under > "differentNameSpace" --> > <input1>input1</input1> > </tns:sayHello> > It's hard to tell if the author may have forgot to > qualify "input1" element or not. > I bet on not. Should we tolerate? > > > > > > > > was: > I had some off-line discussion with Frank and Yang. > Here is the summary: > > As an improvement to consumability, SDO should > tolerate some malformed XML. It is not uncommon for > XML documents to not be less than well-formed. > Rather than failing on deserialization when a > document does not completely conform to its schema, > we should consider making some assumptions and > continuing on. Some competitor technologies do this > today. > > Here's an example. Say we have this schema: > > <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> > <xsd:schema > targetNamespace="http://QuickTest/HelloWorld"; > xmlns:tns="http://QuickTest/HelloWorld"; > xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema"; > elementFormDefault="qualified"> > <xsd:element name="sayHello"> > <xsd:complexType> > <xsd:sequence> > <xsd:element name="input1" nillable="true" > type="xsd:string" /> > </xsd:sequence> > </xsd:complexType> > </xsd:element> > </xsd:schema> > > If we get an xml that looks like this: > > <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> > <tns:sayHello > xmlns:tns="http://QuickTest/HelloWorld"; > > xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"; > xsi:schemaLocation="http://QuickTest/HelloWorld > HelloWorldMessage.xsd "> > <input1>input1</input1> > </tns:sayHello> > > then we will fail validating this since input1 isn't > fully qualified. Here's the xml that would work: > > <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> > <tns:sayHello > xmlns:tns="http://QuickTest/HelloWorld"; > > xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"; > xsi:schemaLocation="http://QuickTest/HelloWorld > HelloWorldMessage.xsd "> > <tns:input1>tns:input1</tns:input1> > </tns:sayHello> > > Frank mentioned 2 potential approaches: > > 1. Read the element in as if it was an open > content property. If you reserialize it would be the > same (still invalid). > 2. If a property with the same name (but different > namespace) exists, then associate it with that. When > you reserialize it will be then be correct. > > The later seems the best approach. > > Yang also contributed the following: > > It's friendly to tolerate if a user forgets to > qualify a local element. There're 3 scenarios may > not have the same elementFormDefault="qualified" > enforcement policy. What do you think? > > 3-1. <tns:sayHello > xmlns:tns="http://QuickTest/HelloWorld";> > <input1>input1</input1> > </tns:sayHello> > > The author may have forgot to qualify "input1" > element, although "input1" may also be a global > element without NameSpace. > It's friendly to tolerate. > > 3-2. <tns:sayHello > xmlns:tns="http://QuickTest/HelloWorld"; === message truncated === ____________________________________________________________________________________ Looking for earth-friendly autos? Browse Top Cars by "Green Rating" at Yahoo! Autos' Green Center. http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
