On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 2:58 PM, Hasan Muhammad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Simon,
>
> Thank you for the good information. First up i am trying to verify whether
> the schema validation works when we point to our schemas. Can you let me
> know what is a simple error that i can introduce so that i can verify
> this?
> I tried doing this to my composite file (In block red):
>
> <component name="MyServiceComponentNew">
> <implementation.java class="mysca.test.myservice.impl.MyServiceImpl"/>
> *<binding.ws/>*
> <property name="location" source="$newLocation"/>
> <property name="year" source="$newYear"/>
> </component>
>
> This resulted in the following exception, but i think this is part of the
> validation done by artifact processor and would result even if we comment
> out the schema validation.
>
> org.apache.tuscany.sca.contribution.service.ContributionReadException:
> Unexpected <binding> element found. It should appear inside a <service> or
> <reference> element
> at
>
> org.apache.tuscany.sca.assembly.xml.CompositeProcessor.read(CompositeProcessor.java:373)
> at
>
> org.apache.tuscany.sca.assembly.xml.CompositeProcessor.read(CompositeProcessor.java:75)
> at
>
> org.apache.tuscany.sca.contribution.processor.ExtensibleStAXArtifactProcessor.read(ExtensibleStAXArtifactProcessor.java:83)
> at
>
> org.apache.tuscany.sca.contribution.service.impl.ContributionServiceImpl.processReadPhase(ContributionServiceImpl.java:475)
> at
>
> org.apache.tuscany.sca.contribution.service.impl.ContributionServiceImpl.addContribution(ContributionServiceImpl.java:383)
> at
>
> org.apache.tuscany.sca.contribution.service.impl.ContributionServiceImpl.contribute(ContributionServiceImpl.java:202)
> at
>
> com.ibm.ws.soa.sca.runtime.impl.DomainCompositeHelper.addContribution(DomainCompositeHelper.java:75)
> at
>
> com.ibm.ws.soa.sca.runtime.impl.SCAContainerComponentImpl.startComposite(SCAContainerComponentImpl.java:235)
> at
>
> com.ibm.ws.soa.sca.admin.runtime.tuscany.SCATuscanyRuntimeHandlerImpl.startModule(SCATuscanyRuntimeHandlerImpl.java:125)
> at
>
> com.ibm.ws.soa.sca.admin.runtime.impl.SCARuntimeImpl.start(SCARuntimeImpl.java:349)
> at
>
> com.ibm.ws.soa.sca.admin.runtime.impl.SCARuntimeImpl.start(SCARuntimeImpl.java:446)
> at
>
> com.ibm.ws.runtime.component.CompositionUnitMgrImpl.start(CompositionUnitMgrImpl.java:331)
> at
>
> com.ibm.ws.runtime.component.CompositionUnitImpl.start(CompositionUnitImpl.java:126)
> at
>
> com.ibm.ws.runtime.component.CompositionUnitMgrImpl.start(CompositionUnitMgrImpl.java:281)
> at
>
> com.ibm.ws.runtime.component.CompositionUnitMgrImpl$CUInitializer.run(CompositionUnitMgrImpl.java:768)
> at
>
> com.ibm.wsspi.runtime.component.WsComponentImpl$_AsynchInitializer.run(WsComponentImpl.java:348)
> at com.ibm.ws.util.ThreadPool$Worker.run(ThreadPool.java:1487)
>
>
> regards
>
> On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 5:56 AM, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 4:33 PM, Hasan Muhammad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > Currently, i see that we have various places where we can plug in
> > > validation
> > > monitoring. Some of the ones that i found are in the
> > > ReallySmallRuntimeBuilder as shown below:
> > >
> > > public static CompositeBuilder
> createCompositeBuilder(AssemblyFactory
> > > assemblyFactory,
> > >
> > SCABindingFactory
> > > scaBindingFactory,
> > >
> > > IntentAttachPointTypeFactory intentAttachPointTypeFactory,
> > >
> > > InterfaceContractMapper interfaceContractMapper,
> > >
> List<PolicySet>
> > > domainPolicySets) {
> > > return new CompositeBuilderImpl(assemblyFactory,
> > scaBindingFactory,
> > > intentAttachPointTypeFactory, interfaceContractMapper,
> domainPolicySets,
> > > null);
> > > }
> > >
> > > public static DomainBuilder createDomainBuilder(AssemblyFactory
> > > assemblyFactory,
> > > SCABindingFactory scaBindingFactory,
> > > IntentAttachPointTypeFactory intentAttachPointTypeFactory,
> > > InterfaceContractMapper interfaceContractMapper,
> > > List<PolicySet> domainPolicySets) {
> > > return new DomainWireBuilderImpl(assemblyFactory,
> > > scaBindingFactory,
> > > intentAttachPointTypeFactory, interfaceContractMapper,
> domainPolicySets,
> > > null);
> > > }
> > >
> > > Instead of passing null, we can pass in our own CompositeBuildMonitor.
> > Are
> > > these the only places where we need to do this? or are there other
> > places
> > > as
> > > well?
> > >
> > > Hasan
> > >
> >
> > Hi Hasan
> >
> > There are a few places that logically we need to be able to validate
> input
> > and hence add monitors. The story is changing a little as we are moving
> > toward the new "workspace" code for managing contributions but
> logically
> > I
> > would expect to be running validating on at least the following
> >
> > - Contribution processing
> > - dependency (imports/exports) analysis
> >
> >
> [org.apache.tuscany.sca.workspace.builder.impl.ContributionDependencyBuilderImpl]
> > - Composite read
> > - schema compliance
> >
> >
> [org.apache.tuscany.sca.contribution.processor.DefaultValidatingXMLInputFactory
> > - only appears to be initialized in ReallySmallRuntimeBuilder so need to
> > look at this in context of workspace]
> > - policy intent matching
> > [org.apache.tuscany.sca.assembly.xml.CompositeDocumentProcessor]
> > - extension availability [General artifact processor hierarchy]
> > - Composite resolve
> > - ensure that artifacts required by the composite are available
> [General
> > artifact resolver hierarchy]
> > - Composite build
> > - ensure that the composite is valid and consistent, e.g. unique
> > component names, valid reference targets etc.
> > [org.apache.tuscany.sca.assembly.builder.impl.CompositeBuilderImpl]
> >
> > I've noted in the square brackets where this function currently is. Note
> > also that I'm making no comment here about whether the construction of
> the
> > in-memory composite model is for use purely for contribution processing
> or
> > is going to activated and started in a runtime. This validation is
> > appropriate in both cases although you may choose to use different
> > monitors
> > in the two cases.
> >
> > So what I suggest as a first step is that you go ahead and change
> > ReallySmallRuntimeBuilder to plug a monitor into CompositeBuilderImpl to
> > see
> > how it works. We can work here to build a consistent view of
> >
> > - all the places a monitor is required
> > - what should the plugin model for monitors be
> > - the flow of control (monitors vs exceptions)
> > - what extra features may be required, I18N etc.
> >
> > I'm going to try a few experiments too to familiarize myself with this a
> > bit
> > more.
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Simon
> >
>
Hi Hasan
The change you suggest should cause a schema validation error. I made the
change locally in samples/calculator and see the following output in stdout
08-Apr-2008 22:41:54
org.apache.tuscany.sca.contribution.processor.ValidatingXMLStreamReader$1
error
WARNING: XMLSchema validation problem in: null, line: 28, column: 5
cvc-complex-type.2.4.a: Invalid content was found starting with element '
binding.ws'. One of '{"http://www.osoa.org/xmlns/sca/1.0":include, "
http://www.osoa.org/xmlns/sca/1.0":service, "
http://www.osoa.org/xmlns/sca/1.0":property, "
http://www.osoa.org/xmlns/sca/1.0":component, "
http://www.osoa.org/xmlns/sca/1.0":reference, "
http://www.osoa.org/xmlns/sca/1.0":wire, WC[##other:"
http://www.osoa.org/xmlns/sca/1.0"]}' is expected.
08-Apr-2008 22:41:54
org.apache.tuscany.sca.contribution.processor.ExtensibleStAXArtifactProcessor
read
WARNING: Element {http://www.osoa.org/xmlns/sca/1.0}binding.ws cannot be
processed. ([row,col {unknown-source}]: [28,5])
No exception is raised though.
Let me take a look at what has changed.
Simon
