Just an addendum... Looking at ValidationContext more, I think it could be used inside an ErrorHandler in order to control/observe validation behavior. I guess the question is now do we modify UnmarshalHandler (the current implementation of ErrorHandler) to use a ValidationContext, or do we separate the ErrorHandler out as a separate object to allow user-swapping of ErrorHandlers? Obviously, in the latter case Castor can still provide one or two implementations of ErrorHandler for users who don't need to implement their own.
Stephen On 3/24/06, Stephen Bash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Keith- > > Skipping over the conversation of American colloquialisms (which would > be very fun at another time, because we have a lot of 'em), I'd like > to discuss the ValidationContext a bit. A (very) quick glance through > the code gives me the impression it was written more for the > marshalling process than unmarshalling. Do you think it is amenable > to both processes? > > I was thinking in a more general sense of just allowing the user to > specify an ErrorHandler (similar to EntityResolver, just add an > Unmarshaller.setErrorHandler method, if undefined, use a fail fast > system to mirror current practice) while providing a few basic ones in > the Castor distribution (to steal your terms, FailFastErrorHandler and > FailOnFatalErrorHandler). Longer term I was thinking a > StatefulErrorHandler would be nice, but it really depends on how much > information the ErrorHandler could get out of the UnmarshalListener at > runtime. This might be more along the lines of the ValidationContext, > but my brain isn't combining the two real well yet. > > In any case, let me know your thoughts (and everyone else is free to > throw in US$0.02 also). > > Thanks, > Stephen > > > On 3/24/06, Werner Guttmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > For those of you not being natively English, have a look at > > > > http://www.thefreedictionary.com/guys > > > > Where it (to my own surprise) it is stated that 'guys' really can be used > > in the sense as descibed by Keith. > > > > Guy, noun > > 1. Informal A man; a fellow. > > 2. guys Informal *** Persons of either sex. *** > > 3. Chiefly British A person of odd or grotesque appearance or dress. > > > > And I thought for a second that Keith is making up a story ... ;-) > > > > Werner > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Keith Visco [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Sent: Freitag, 24. März 2006 07:44 > > > To: [email protected] > > > Subject: Re: [castor-user] When unmarshalling, need Castor to > > > validate entire document against schema instead of quitting > > > after first validation error > > > > > > > > > Oops. I just got a private e-mail from an observant member > > > pointing out my lack of attention to detail. Just to be > > > clear, I used the term "guys" > > > in a strictly generic way which included both genders. I > > > should be more careful to use gender-non-specific terms when > > > addressing more than one person. My apologies to the female audience. > > > > > > --Keith > > > > > > Keith Visco wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi guys, > > > > > > > > Take a look at ValidationContext and ValidationException. I already > > > > started the groundwork for this. You'll see that > > > ValidationException > > > > already supports chaining and ValidationContext has a > > > fail-fast flag. > > > > Unfortunately, disabling fail-fast has not yet been > > > implemented, but > > > > it was definately on my to-do list. I don't think it would be that > > > > difficult to implement for the Marshaller...but doing so in a "safe" > > > > manner during unmarshalling may be a bit more challenging. > > > > > > > > --Keith > > > > > > > > Werner Guttmann wrote: > > > > > > > >> Stephen, Patty > > > >> > > > >>> -----Original Message----- > > > >>> From: Stephen Bash [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: > > > Donnerstag, 23. > > > >>> März 2006 14:45 > > > >>> To: [email protected] > > > >>> Subject: Re: [castor-user] When unmarshalling, need Castor to > > > >>> validate entire document against schema instead of quitting after > > > >>> first validation error > > > >>> > > > >>> Patty- > > > >>> > > > >>> Unfortunately, I don't think you can replace the ErrorHandler in > > > >>> such a way that the change will stick. When you call > > > unmarshal, the > > > >>> Unmarshaller sets the error handler just before starting > > > parsing. > > > >>> So that means the fix needs to live inside Castor, unless > > > we create > > > >>> a method for user-supplied ErrorHandlers. > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> If we decide to do so, why not a similar mechanism to DTDResolver, > > > >> which allows some sort of chaining. > > > >> > > > >> Werner > > > >> > > > >> ------------------------------------------------- > > > >> If you wish to unsubscribe from this list, please send an empty > > > >> message to the following address: > > > >> > > > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > >> ------------------------------------------------- > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------- > > > > If you wish to unsubscribe from this list, please send an empty > > > > message to the following address: > > > > > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > ------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------- > > > If you wish to unsubscribe from this list, please send an > > > empty message to the following address: > > > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > ------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------- > > If you wish to unsubscribe from this list, please > > send an empty message to the following address: > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > ------------------------------------------------- > > > > >
