xmlunit-general — Everything XMLUnit ;0)

[Xmlunit-general] Allowing InputSource Everywhere

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

Hi,

while reading through Elliote Rusty Harold's "Testing XML" slides, in
particular
<http://www.cafeconleche.org/slides/sd2007west/testingxml/54.html> I
decided to add overloads that accept a SAX InputSource wherever you
could use a Reader.

So far I've extended NodeTester and Transform and much of Validator
(the case where we replace a DOCTYPE declaration isn't covered right
now).  The XMLAssert and XMLTestCase overloads will follow.

Stefan

Re: [Xmlunit-general] Documentation Updates

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

On Tue, 27 Mar 2007, Stefan Bodewig <bo...@ap...> wrote:

> I've committed multiple updates to the Docbook docs over the past
> days, whenever I do I also refresh the content of
> <http://stefan.samaflost.de/xmlunit/docbook/> so you don't need to
> install the Docbook toolchain to review the results.

Hmm, maybe I should add:

* I'm not a native speaker.

* I write most of the docs pretty late in the evening or pretty early
  in the morning.

* I haven't even run ispell over the docs, yet.

So any kind of review is more than welcome.

Stefan

[Xmlunit-general] Documentation Updates

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

Hi,

I've committed multiple updates to the Docbook docs over the past
days, whenever I do I also refresh the content of
<http://stefan.samaflost.de/xmlunit/docbook/> so you don't need to
install the Docbook toolchain to review the results.

Right now I've moved Tim's original text to an introductionary
section, added a skeleton f what I still want to add and fleshed out
the "Using XMLUnit" section as well as the "Changes" appendix.

Stefan

[Xmlunit-general] Trackers Restructured

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

Hi,

after seeing what Dave Saff did over in JUnit I decided it was a good
idea to close down two of our four trackers.  I moved all issues of
the "Support Requests" and "Patches" trackers to either "Bugs" and
"Feature Requests" and closed the former two.

We welcome patches for bug reports and feature requests and at least I
am not prepared to deal with support requests on three different
channels - mailing list, forum and a tracker.

At the same time I modified the remaining tracker to send a mail to
the commits list if one of the items changes - this won't be visible
to anybody but me right now ;-)

Stefan

Re: [Xmlunit-general] Documentation Revisited

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

On Tue, 20 Mar 2007, Stefan Bodewig <bo...@ap...> wrote:

> Last night I gave Docbook a try, the result can be seen here
> <http://stefan.samaflost.de/xmlunit/docbook/>.

I've updated that directory to show the results of ...

> The next step will be moving the existing document from PDF to
> docbook which will be a boring manual task ...

... a complete transformation of the existing guide to Simplified
Docbook.

Now I can start to modify the docs to reflect the more recent changes.

Stefan

[Xmlunit-general] Documentation Revisited

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

Hi all,

the past five or six weeks I've been swamped in real live and was too
tired to do any actual OSS work when I came home from work, sorry
about the delay.

Last night I gave Docbook a try, the result can be seen here
<http://stefan.samaflost.de/xmlunit/docbook/>.  The .dbx file is the
source, the Ant build file generates the HTML output.  PDF has been
generated by dblatex[1] and looks more than promising (and far better
than the FOP results I remember).  What you see there is the default
output of the XSL stylesheets and dblatex, both can be tweaked in
several ways.

Installing dblatex on a Linux/Unix/Mac box shouldn't pose any problems
and it even went smoothely on my (Cygwin powered) WinXP work notebook.

So far I've tried to stick with Simplified Docbook[2] since it covers
all that we need and will keep the learning curve acceptable.

I also looked into Open Office (I really did) but think we should
prefer (Simplified) Docbook.  The syntax is pretty easy, our users can
be supposed to be XML savvy and the output looks really well.

The next step will be moving the existing document from PDF to docbook
which will be a boring manual task ...

Stefan

Footnotes: 
[1]  http://dblatex.sourceforge.net/

[2]  http://www.docbook.org/xml/simple/

[Xmlunit-general] =?iso-8859-9?q?kilolar=FDn=FDzdan_memnunmusunuz?=

[<her...@my...>]

Do=F0ru se=E7imi yap=FDn
Bazen, bir i=FEe giri=FEmeye ve farkl=FD bir =FEeyler yapmaya karar vermek =
=E7ok kolay olmayabilir=2E
Ortalama k=FC=E7=FCk =F6l=E7ekli bir i=FEletme kurma maliyetinin =E7ok =
pahal=FD oldu=F0unu ve bu i=FEletmelerin bir=E7o=F0unun ilk y=FDllar=FDnda =
kapanmak zorunda kald=FD=F0=FDn=FD biliyor muydunuz? Herbalite ile kendi =
i=FEinizi y=FCr=FCtme zorlu=F0unun =F6n=FCne ge=E7mekteyiz. Stok tutma =
zorunlulu=F0u, sabit genel giderler ve y=FCksek yat=FDr=FDm maliyetlerine =
gerek yok, Herbalife'la =E7al=FD=FEmak i=E7in Uluslararas=FD i=FE =
Paketi'ni edinmeniz yeterli!
=DDster sonu belirsiz bir i=FEte m=FCcadele ediyor olun ister ekstra bir =
gelir ama=E7l=FDyor olun, Herbalife size iyi bir =DD=FE F=FDrsat=FD =
sunmaktad=FDr. Herbalife sayesinde evinizden =E7al=FD=FEma =
=F6zg=FCrl=FC=F0=FCne, kendi patronunuz olma imkan=FDna ve sadece =
istedi=F0iniz =FEeyleri yapabilme f=FDrsat=FDna sahip olacaks=FDn=FDz. =
Art=FDk i=FE y=FCk=FC alt=FDnda ezilmek, ailenizi =F6zlemek veya i=FEten =
=E7=FDkar=FDlma korkusu duymak yok. Herbalife i=FEinizde, =E7al=FD=FEmaya =
ay=FDraca=F0=FDn=FDz zaman=FD siz belirlersiniz. =DEu an bulundu=F0unuz =
noktadan ne kadar ileriye gidece=F0iniz ve ne kadar para =
kazanabilece=F0iniz tamamen sizin ellerinizde! Herbalife, iyi bir gelir =
elde etmek i=E7in s=FDk=FD =E7al=FD=FEmay=FD gerektirir, ancak =
ak=FDll=FDca =E7al=FD=FEarak bir yandan e=F0lenebilir, hayallerinizi =
ger=E7e=F0e d=F6n=FC=FEt=FCrebilir bir yandan da insanlar=FDn =
hayatlar=FDna mutluluk katabilirsiniz=2E
detayl=FD bilgi i=E7in otsuyasam.com yada otluyasam.com sitelerinden bize =
ula=FEabilir yada maili cevaplayarak ula=FEabilirsiniz=20
     bizden mail almak istemiyorsan=FDz l=FCtfen bunu bize =
bildiriniz..=

[Xmlunit-general] XMLTestCase is now abstract

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

Hi all,

just a heads up that after I received positive feedback a few weeks
ago I went ahead and made XMLTestCasse abstract.

At least the few projects that build in apache Gump and use XMLUnit
didn't suffer any problems with the change.

Stefan

Re: [Xmlunit-general] Documentation

[David C. <dc...@st...>]

Actually, I'm looking at more of a long term maintainability format. 
While latex and other formats allow for more technical implementation, I 
personally think those formats as well as XSL-FO are more suited for 
automated documentation generation. Word, I agree with I hate it, OO 2.1 
and 2.0, personally I haven't had any problems with. Regardless, though 
I think either a Word or OO format allows for a greater number of people 
to contribute to writing the documentation instead of just relying on a 
narrow skill and tool set.

Just my two cents.

Dave

Re: [Xmlunit-general] Documentation

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

On Fri, 02 Feb 2007, David Carver <dc...@st...> wrote:
> Stefan Bodewig wrote:
>> Yes, absolutely.  We are talking about tutorial style docs.
>>
>
> If you are talking about tutorial style docs, then I suggest
> sticking with an open standard that is WYSIWYG editing, and that
> would be OpenDocument. Open Office already runs on Windows, Mac, and
> Linux.

I wonder how big a diff would look if I just changed a few words.  Or
how big the document would be in the first place,

Also - and that may be just me - I really don't enjoy using a WYSIWYG
editor at all.  I hate using Word at work and so far my experience
with OO has been even worse.  My brain just doesn't work the way they
need it to work.

Stefan

Re: [Xmlunit-general] svn migration started

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

On Fri, 02 Feb 2007, Stefan Bodewig <bo...@ap...> wrote:
> On Fri, 02 Feb 2007, Stefan Bodewig <bo...@ap...> wrote:

> xmlunit-commits@sourceforge
> 
>> for commit mails and enable those mails once we are done - and I'll
>> disable CVS.
> 
> pending until list setup is complete.

commit mails work.  I'll disable CVS pretty soon.

Stefan

Re: [Xmlunit-general] Documentation

[David C. <dc...@st...>]

Stefan Bodewig wrote:
> On Thu, 01 Feb 2007, David Carver <dc...@st...> wrote:
>
>   
>> Sorry, I can in on the middle of this conversation.
>>     
>
> Don't worry.
>
>   
>> JavaDoc documentation works well, enough.  Are we talking about a
>> more expanded version or something else?
>>     
>
> Yes, absolutely.  We are talking about tutorial style docs.
>   
If you are talking about tutorial style docs, then I suggest sticking 
with an open standard that is WYSIWYG editing, and that would be 
OpenDocument. Open Office already runs on Windows, Mac, and Linux. You 
have the ability to for PDFS or HTML. All output is XML so if you need 
to automate or generate it you can easily enough with XSLT or XQuery.

Dav

Re: [Xmlunit-general] Documentation

[David C. <dc...@st...>]

> Our users are probably more familiar with Docbook and XSLT than TeX.
>
> I'd still need to see what the current state of PDF generated by
> Docbook + XSLT + Apache FOP looks like.
>   
I have no experience with DocBook, but personally, I would recommend 
OpenDocument as the format to use.

1. It can be created with OpenOffice or any other editor that reads and 
writes ODT Files.

2. It's XML Based so you can minipulate it and create it with XSLT if 
necessary.

3. It has built in PDF generation.

4. It's multi-platform and doesn't rely on just being in a UNIX environment.

As for FOP, FOP is good (I use it all the time), but you have to stick 
with the XSL-FO that it supports, if you go outside of that, you don't 
get the good features. So, my recommendation is the OpenOffice Format, 
and you then have the ability to automate it to generate HTML, PDF, 
Word, ODT, etc.

Dave

Re: [Xmlunit-general] svn migration started

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

On Fri, 02 Feb 2007, Stefan Bodewig <bo...@ap...> wrote:

> just wanted to let you know that I've triggered the CVS -> SVN
> migration process of sourceforge.

which finished within a few minutes ...

<https://xmlunit.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/xmlunit/>

> I'll create a new maillist

triggered, but is not yet fully functional:  xmlunit-commits@sourceforge

> for commit mails and enable those mails once we are done - and I'll
> disable CVS.

pending until list setup is complete.

Stefan

Re: [Xmlunit-general] Documentation

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

On Fri, 2 Feb 2007, James Abley <jam...@gm...> wrote:

> I guess we need to be explicit about what is required.

My minimal requirements:

* diff-friendly source format - XML or plain text (like TeX) works

* create PDF and HTML from one source

* should be able to format source code properly (or keep the
  formating)

* PDF output should look acceptable

> My belief, although I may be wrong, is that using DocBook would give
> more otions about the target output format. LaTeX lets you target PS
> and thus PDF,

actually LaTeX targets DVI (which means device independent) and there
are several tools for converting DVI to other formats including PS 8-)

> I've also heard that it tends to be quite tightly coupled to the
> presentation layer

That's not my experience, but usually I don't want to tweak the output
it generates anymore.

In the past I've had some unpleasant problems with Docbook (maybe it
was FOP's fault, not Docbook's) and I've nothing but praise for
LaTeX.  So I'm biased, but I could live with Docbook if nobody shares
my preferences 8-)

Maybe we should add

* format should encourage user contributions

Our users are probably more familiar with Docbook and XSLT than TeX.

I'd still need to see what the current state of PDF generated by
Docbook + XSLT + Apache FOP looks like.

Stefan

[Xmlunit-general] svn migration started

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

Hi all,

just wanted to let you know that I've triggered the CVS -> SVN
migration process of sourceforge.  I'll create a new maillist for
commit mails and enable those mails once we are done - and I'll
disable CVS.

Cheers

        Stefan

Re: [Xmlunit-general] Documentation

[James A. <jam...@gm...>]

I guess we need to be explicit about what is required. My belief,
although I may be wrong, is that using DocBook would give more otions
about the target output format. LaTeX lets you target PS and thus PDF,
but I don't know what else it can do. I've also heard that it tends to
be quite tightly coupled to the presentation layer whereas DocBook
gives more options; just insert a modified XSLT into the XML
publishing pipeline, or modify your CSS if you're producing good
semantic XHTML. Then again, do we require that sort of power here
anyway? Do you have a view on that?

On 02/02/07, Stefan Bodewig <bo...@ap...> wrote:
> On Thu, 1 Feb 2007, James Abley <jam...@gm...> wrote:
>
> > What about tooling support? Editors with good XML support are fairly
> > ubiquitous; presumably there are similar things for LaTeX available
> > both to emacs / vi and to other editors?
>
> Emacs has AucTex (which I've been using for about twelve years now
> 8-), and there even are visual editors for TeX[1], but I never tried
> them.
>
> While at a former job I wrote an Ant task to run LaTeX (as often as
> needed), I should be able to re-invent it rather quickly.
>
> Creating HTML or XSL:FO from docbook is a matter of running XSLT which
> is trivial using Ant.  Apache FOP comes with an Ant task to create PDF
> (and RTF?) from FO.
>
> > I'll have a look at what's currently in CVS with a view to
> > contributing a DocBook version of some of it,
>
> Maybe you could just start with a section or two like I did for the
> LaTeX case.  That way we may have a basis to compare things.

That was my plan.

>
> Stefan
>
> Footnotes:
> [1]  for example http://www.lyx.org/
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
> Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier.
> Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo
> http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642
> _______________________________________________
> Xmlunit-general mailing list
> Xml...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xmlunit-general
>

Re: [Xmlunit-general] Documentation

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

On Thu, 01 Feb 2007, David Carver <dc...@st...> wrote:

> Sorry, I can in on the middle of this conversation.

Don't worry.

> JavaDoc documentation works well, enough.  Are we talking about a
> more expanded version or something else?

Yes, absolutely.  We are talking about tutorial style docs.

Stefan

Re: [Xmlunit-general] Documentation

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

On Thu, 1 Feb 2007, James Abley <jam...@gm...> wrote:

> What about tooling support? Editors with good XML support are fairly
> ubiquitous; presumably there are similar things for LaTeX available
> both to emacs / vi and to other editors?

Emacs has AucTex (which I've been using for about twelve years now
8-), and there even are visual editors for TeX[1], but I never tried
them.

While at a former job I wrote an Ant task to run LaTeX (as often as
needed), I should be able to re-invent it rather quickly.

Creating HTML or XSL:FO from docbook is a matter of running XSLT which
is trivial using Ant.  Apache FOP comes with an Ant task to create PDF
(and RTF?) from FO.

> I'll have a look at what's currently in CVS with a view to
> contributing a DocBook version of some of it,

Maybe you could just start with a section or two like I did for the
LaTeX case.  That way we may have a basis to compare things.

Stefan

Footnotes: 
[1]  for example http://www.lyx.org/

Re: [Xmlunit-general] Documentation

[David C. <dc...@st...>]

Sorry, I can in on the middle of this conversation.   JavaDoc 
documentation works well, enough.   Are we talking about a more expanded 
version or something else?   Regardless of what format we have, at least 
if you want a more polished version then the final document should be 
represented in PDF

Dave

Re: [Xmlunit-general] Documentation

[James A. <jam...@gm...>]

Again, I don't know LaTeX, beyond having read about it in various books [1].

I would definitely lean towards DocBook, which I've used a little.
What about tooling support? Editors with good XML support are fairly
ubiquitous; presumably there are similar things for LaTeX available
both to emacs / vi and to other editors?

I'll have a look at what's currently in CVS with a view to
contributing a DocBook version of some of it, and then look at the
publishing chain. I have reasonable XSLT knowledge, so that shouldn't
be too hard.

Cheers,

James

[1] http://www.faqs.org/docs/artu/

On 01/02/07, Stefan Bodewig <bo...@ap...> wrote:
> On Wed, 31 Jan 2007, Jeff Martin <je...@cu...> wrote:
>
> > I don't really know LaTeX, so I can't really give a balanced opinion
>
> I've converted the first two sections and a listing to LaTeX for
> reference <http://stefan.samaflost.de/xmlunit/>.  The .tex file is
> plain text, lines starting with % are commented out.
>
> > but my preference would be for docbook.
>
> fair enough.  Of course it is far more verbose.
>
> > I'd agree that the standard PDF stylesheets aren't necessarily the
> > most asthetically pleasing
>
> I haven't tried it lately, maybe they've improved.
>
> > but getting people to edit the document source is going to be more
> > important than a beautiful printed document.
>
> Absolutely, but I think that would be possible for LaTeX as well since
> it really basically is plain text.
>
> Stefan
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
> Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier.
> Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo
> http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642
> _______________________________________________
> Xmlunit-general mailing list
> Xml...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xmlunit-general
>

Re: [Xmlunit-general] XMLUnit Java 1.1 roadmap

[James A. <jam...@gm...>]

On 31/01/07, Stefan Bodewig <bo...@ap...> wrote:
> Here's my current short list of things to do before a 1.1 release:
>
> * move to subversion
>
> * make whitespace consistent inside the sources

>From my recent patch about XML Schema validation, I'm guessing you
mean all the tabs? I would welcome tab removal from the sources!

>
> * documentation
>
> * add example code that asserts regular expressions on XPath results -
>   this would fix the only remaining open issue.
>
> Am I missing something that's important for anybody?
>
> Stefan
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
> Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
> opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
> http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
> _______________________________________________
> Xmlunit-general mailing list
> Xml...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xmlunit-general
>

Nothing else I want to see currently - if there is, then I'll shout
and hopefully provide a patch for discussion.

Cheers,

James

Re: [Xmlunit-general] Making XMLTestCase abstract?

[James A. <jam...@gm...>]

+1

On 31/01/07, Stefan Bodewig <bo...@ap...> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> there is a Feature Request to make XMLTestCase abstract since
> Eclipse's (and probably other's) TestRunner sees the class and tries
> to run it as a test suite, which fails because it doesn't contain any
> test cases.
>
> I turned down the issue with "can't do it because of backwards
> compatibility" but after having second and third thoughts I favor
> making the class abstract now.
>
> If people extend XMLTestCase they won't be hurt and anybody who
> creates an instance of XMLTestCase most likely should better use
> XMLAssert.
>
> What do you think?
>
> Stefan
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
> Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
> opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
> http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
> _______________________________________________
> Xmlunit-general mailing list
> Xml...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xmlunit-general
>

Re: [Xmlunit-general] Documentation

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

On Wed, 31 Jan 2007, Jeff Martin <je...@cu...> wrote:

> I don't really know LaTeX, so I can't really give a balanced opinion

I've converted the first two sections and a listing to LaTeX for
reference <http://stefan.samaflost.de/xmlunit/>.  The .tex file is
plain text, lines starting with % are commented out.

> but my preference would be for docbook.

fair enough.  Of course it is far more verbose.

> I'd agree that the standard PDF stylesheets aren't necessarily the
> most asthetically pleasing

I haven't tried it lately, maybe they've improved.

> but getting people to edit the document source is going to be more
> important than a beautiful printed document.

Absolutely, but I think that would be possible for LaTeX as well since
it really basically is plain text.

Stefan

Re: [Xmlunit-general] Documentation

[Jeff M. <je...@cu...>]

I don't really know LaTeX, so I can't really give a balanced opinion
but my preference would be for docbook.  I think that generally people
are fairly comfortable to XML formats and Docbook is one of the best
established formats and one that's is designed for technical
documents. I'd agree that the standard PDF stylesheets aren't
necessarily the most asthetically pleasing and that creating FO
stylesheets from scratch is a bit of a chore but getting people to
edit the document source is going to be more important than a
beautiful printed document.

On 31/01/07, Stefan Bodewig <bo...@ap...> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've always liked the fact that there is a PDF guide to XMLUnit, but I
> don't see myself editing rtf files to adapt it to the new features.
> Also I'd like to put more emphasis on using the XMLUnit API instead of
> using XMLTestCase so I'd have to make some bigger changes and CVS/svn
> history of binary files is non-existant.
>
> So I'm looking for ways to create PDF (and maybe HTML) output from a
> text format.  The obvious candidates are LaTeX and Docbook, using
> Apache Forrest may be an option as well.  I know LaTeX really well, so
> it would be my personal preference.  When I last tried Docbook its PDF
> output wasn't really pretty and my knowledge of XSL:FO was (and still
> is) far too limited to create better stylesheets.
>
> Any opinions?
>
> Stefan
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
> Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
> opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
> http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
> _______________________________________________
> Xmlunit-general mailing list
> Xml...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xmlunit-general
>