I looked at the bug you submitted, and tried to fix it. But it turned out
to be more difficult than I thought. I just assigned that bug to myself.
Hope I'll come up with a solution.
Thanks,
Sandy Gao
Software Developer, IBM Canada
(1-905) 413-3255
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Aleksandar
Milanovic" To: "Xerces-J-User"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<[EMAIL PROTECTED] cc:
sinc.com> Subject: FW: validation adds a
fixed optional attribute that does not comply with the
attribute form
09/17/2002 07:28
PM
Please respond to
xerces-j-user
Hello everybody,
Few weeks ago I sent the emails below about a critical bug, and I also
submitted this bug in Bugzilla (#12557). My question is, what will happen
next? Will anybody try to look at it? Nobody has replied to my emails.
In my opinion, this is a critical bug because:
1. It makes a valid document invalid
2. It happens in most cases when GML
(http://www.opengis.net/gml/01-029/GML2.html) data is being validated.
GML is a world standard for the encoding of geography data. I suppose that
as such it deserves a bit of attention from XML parser developers.
Cheers,
Alex
-----Original Message-----
From: Aleksandar Milanovic [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 4:05 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: validation adds a fixed optional attribute that does not
comply with the attribute form
It appears that this problem still exists in Xerces 2.1.0.
Alex
-----Original Message-----
From: Aleksandar Milanovic [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 2:36 PM
To: Xerces-J-User
Subject: validation adds a fixed optional attribute that does not comply
with the attribute form
Hi All,
This problem happended indeed with a nightly build (Xerces 2.0.2, August
19), but it could still be lurking around. Xerces complies with the XML
Schema spec. in that it adds fixed optional attributes that are missing in
an instance document. The problem is that the added attribute is not
qualified, although its schema definition defines it explicitly as a
qualified attribute (using form="qualified"). The result is an invalid
instance document (isn't it ironic that the validation of a valid document
produces an invalid document :)).
Anyone know if this has been fixed in the mean time?
thx
Alex
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
