Re: [Xmlunit-general] Schema Validation patch development

[Stefan B. <bo...@ap...>]

On Tue, 2 Jan 2007, James Abley <jam...@gm...> wrote:
> On 22/12/06, Stefan Bodewig <bo...@ap...> wrote:
>> On Thu, 21 Dec 2006, James Abley <jam...@gm...> wrote:
>>
>> > I'm writing a patch for consideration that will handle schema
>> > validation.
>>
>> [please use CVS diff to create patches, it is easier to see what
>> has changed that way]
> 
> Will do - I'm just TDDing the feature at the moment and wanted to
> give a little context.

That's fine.  Thank you.

>> > In developing the tests for this patch though, I seem to have hit
>> > a bug, and was hoping someone could help me see what I'm doing
>> > wrong.  The below tests fail, although I don't think they
>> > should. I can't see what properties I should be setting that
>> > would cause it to pass.
>>
>> >     private String expected = "<root
>> >     xmlns='http://www.example.com/xmlns/example'" + "
>> >         + xmlns:xsi='http://exampe.com/xmlns/not/schema-instance/namespace'/>";;
>> >     private String actual =  "<root xmlns='http://www.example.com/xmlns/example' />";
>>
>> Why do you expect them to be different?  The
>> http://exampe.com/xmlns/not/schema-instance/namespace is never
>> used.
>>
> 
> Well, because it has the namespace declaration and to my current way
> of thinking, that's just an attribute with special semantics.

The way XMLUnit treats it it is not an attribute at all.  This has a
few benefits like allowing to documents to be equal if they use the
same namespaces but chose different prefixes for example.

If you declare a namespace but never use it, this will never be seen
by XMLUnit since (as you've seen) this doesn't affect the DOM tree at
all.

Do you think this is a problem?

> I just realised that the mails on this list don't have the
> Reply-To header set to the mailing list, hence the reason I've been
> replying to individuals rather than the list. Might it be possible
> to alter that?

I'll note that setting ot not setting Reply-To headers is the subject
of heated discussions (just do a search for "reply-to considered
harmful" with your favorite search engine).  Fortunately I use a MUA
that deals with either way so I'm pretty indifferent.

I don't have karma to change that setting, though.  Jeff?

Cheers

        Stefan