Stephen, I'd prefer to see a solution being implemented that provides the same level of 'comfort' as the current EntityResolver. For those folks who don't want/need to use an EntityResolver, we provide a default one (DTDResolver). I think we should aim for something similar here.
Werner Stephen Bash wrote: > 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] >>> ------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------- If you wish to unsubscribe from this list, please send an empty message to the following address: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -------------------------------------------------
