On Tue, Feb 05, 2008 at 05:46:54PM +0530, murali wrote: > > indirectly and you get a warning but not really related to parsing. > Sometime > > this can be fixed, sometime it's hard because the APIs don't let the > option > > go though. So without more data it's basically impossible to answer. > > >Daniel > > Find the scenario below. > options = 0; > options |= (XML_PARSE_NOENT); > options |= (XML_PARSE_NONET); > options |= (XML_PARSE_NOBLANKS); > options |= (XML_PARSE_DTDLOAD); > options |= (XML_PARSE_DTDATTR); > options |= (XML_PARSE_NOWARNING); > ParserCtxt = xmlCreateMemoryParserCtxt(DocBuffer, DocBufferSize); > xmlDetectSAX2Extn(ParserCtxt); > xmlCtxtUseOptions(ParserCtxt,options); > xmlParseDocument(ParserCtxt); > > if I parse the document which will generate warning, then I get worning even > though I have set the option XML_PARSE_NOWARNING. > Hope this will answer your question regarding usage scenario.
No. This doesn't tell me how you got the warning, what part of libxml2 sent it. If you had a warning emitted say from the Catalog processing part this won't be connected to the options set in the parser context and will be reported anyway. I can't tell from your report if it's a simple fixeable bug or due to a side effect of parsing. Daniel -- Red Hat Virtualization group http://redhat.com/virtualization/ Daniel Veillard | virtualization library http://libvirt.org/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] | libxml GNOME XML XSLT toolkit http://xmlsoft.org/ http://veillard.com/ | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/ _______________________________________________ xml mailing list, project page http://xmlsoft.org/ [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/xml
