Hi Eddie/Rick, I did a few experiments with the locations Xerces gives with errors, and I concluded they weren't reliable enough. Our users won't peek around in the XML file. That's why I'm more inclined towards the path location. That one is much closer to Schematron, anyway.
Jan Eddie Robertson wrote: > >For that, we could use a common way of locating errors. I'm afraid that > >getting the physical locations from Schematron is too difficult a task and > >the result might not quite match the physical locations by Xerces. > > There are two issues here: > 1) How accurate are the line numbers generated by Xerces? > 2) How to get Schematron to report line numbers > > For the first, Xerces does not seem to distinguish between > errors in markup and errors in values enough. So if an > element with text content does not match a datatype, the > error will be reported as occurring at the close of > the end-tag for that element (something like that, anyway). > > Given that problem, merging errors is difficult. > > For the second: if you use XT and schematron-message.xsl, > you can get line numbers. We had to customize ours to > get column numbers as well, but it is straghtforward. > > Cheers > Rick Jelliffe > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
