This Bugzilla instance is deprecated, and most Eclipse projects now use GitHub or Eclipse GitLab. Please see the deprecation plan for details.
Bug 238492 - Support xml:base in validator
Summary: Support xml:base in validator
Status: CLOSED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: z_Archived
Classification: Eclipse Foundation
Component: Cosmos (show other bugs)
Version: unspecified   Edit
Hardware: All All
: P2 enhancement (vote)
Target Milestone: ---   Edit
Assignee: John Arwe CLA
QA Contact: David Whiteman CLA
URL: http://wiki.eclipse.org/COSMOS_Design...
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2008-06-25 17:22 EDT by David Whiteman CLA
Modified: 2012-01-03 13:47 EST (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:


Attachments
Full fix (404.91 KB, patch)
2009-01-15 12:59 EST, John Arwe CLA
dlwhiteman: iplog+
Details | Diff

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description David Whiteman CLA 2008-06-25 17:22:51 EDT
This is an optional SML feature we will need to support.

It should be noted that using DOM will allow for retrieval of base URI information.
Comment 1 David Whiteman CLA 2008-08-07 14:53:47 EDT
xml:base has been approved in the SML workgroup.  See here:

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=5542
Comment 2 John Arwe CLA 2008-08-28 09:03:55 EDT
This is now a spec compliance issue.

As a consequence of the 8/2008 wg decision, xml:base support is now required for conforming producers.  I.e., a conforming producer must be able to produce a document that uses xml:base as the syntax for base URI values.  An implementation is free to choose whether to do so all the time, only when relative references subject to SMLIF URI processing are actually present, or any other criteria it sees fit to use.
Comment 3 John Arwe CLA 2009-01-15 12:59:17 EST
Created attachment 122698 [details]
Full fix

Fixes 238492 plus the closely related bugs below
257780 Relative URIs in rule bindings are not transformed into absolute URIs 
255706 Null ptr exception in Java processing URN URIs
Comment 4 David Whiteman CLA 2009-01-27 09:48:58 EST
I have applied the patch, and most of the changes were accepted and checked in.  However, the following could not be determined by the tool and were rejected.  Please sync with the repoistory and then submit another patch for the delta that was not included so that your changes get in.  In the worst case, you can provide a zip of the raw source files that were not included in the first bath.  I do see that a couple of the files included in the patch were from the bin directory - we only try to store the src directory contents.

The following components to the patch were rejected by the apply patch tool:

		Description	Resource	Path	Location	Type
		Rejected patch	Base64DTDEntity.xml.rej	org.eclipse.cosmos.rm.validation.tests/src/test-resources/base64	Unknown	Rejected Patch
		Rejected patch	Base64DTDInvalidXML.xml.rej	org.eclipse.cosmos.rm.validation.tests/src/test-resources/base64	Unknown	Rejected Patch
		Rejected patch	InValid.output.rej	org.eclipse.cosmos.rm.validation.tests/bin/expected-results/targetRequired	Unknown	Rejected Patch
		Rejected patch	InValidConstraintGroup.xml.rej	org.eclipse.cosmos.rm.validation.tests/src/test-resources/identity	Unknown	Rejected Patch
		Rejected patch	TestElementSchematronCacheBuilder.java.rej	org.eclipse.cosmos.rm.validation.tests/src/org/eclipse/cosmos/rm/internal/validation/databuilders	Unknown	Rejected Patch
		Rejected patch	ValidConstraintRefKeyref.xml.rej	org.eclipse.cosmos.rm.validation.tests/src/test-resources/identity	Unknown	Rejected Patch
		Rejected patch	rulesWithMultiplePattern.xml.rej	org.eclipse.cosmos.rm.validation.tests/src/test-resources/others	Unknown	Rejected Patch
		Rejected patch	rulesWithMultipleRulesUnderOnePattern.xml.rej	org.eclipse.cosmos.rm.validation.tests/src/test-resources/others	Unknown	Rejected Patch

		
I won't mark this fixed until we get all of the necessary changes in.  I will also need some help running the tests, as I'm apparently not current on my validator settings.
Comment 5 John Arwe CLA 2009-01-27 14:05:15 EST
Net: we just need to figure out how we wish to handle copyrights.  I was planned on opening a new bug and running the copyright tool on the entire workspace to let it catch missed updates after this was integrated.  If you prefer to keep all the copyright updates together, we're done with this bug now (i.e. we move on to your setup for running the tests).  If you prefer to update the 3 copyright updates that were rejected and do the rest later, I can build a patch containing only these 3.

The majority of them were rejected (I think) because they were likely incorporated into an already-applied patch.  Comparing them individually against latest from HEAD, I see the following:

...rm.validation.tests/src/test-resources/base64/Base64DTDEntity.xml
copyright-only change, to add 2009

...rm.validation.tests/src/test-resources/base64/Base64DTDInvalidXML.xml
copyright-only change, to add 2009

...rm.validation.tests/bin/expected-results/targetRequired/InValid.output
I'm not sure why this shows as changed, but I think we can ignore it.  I compared the entire /bin/expected-results/* tree in my workspace against /src/expected-results/* and they are identical.  I know I included binaries in the patch file generation in order to be sure I didn't miss .testsuite and its ilk (in case I had forgotten that I made updates there...I remember none).

...rm.validation.tests/src/test-resources/identity/InValidConstraintGroup.xml
my wksp == latest from HEAD

..rm.validation.tests/src/org/eclipse/cosmos/rm/internal/validation/databuilders/TestElementSchematronCacheBuilder.java
conflicting change, but only on copyright date

...rm.validation.tests/src/test-resources/identity/ValidConstraintRefKeyref.xml
my wksp == latest from HEAD

...rm.validation.tests/src/test-resources/others/rulesWithMultiplePattern.xml
my wksp == latest from HEAD

...rm.validation.tests/src/test-resources/others/rulesWithMultipleRulesUnderOnePattern.xml
my wksp == latest from HEAD
Comment 6 David Whiteman CLA 2009-01-27 14:08:43 EST
So it sounds like all the changes I didn't pick up were not significant to the fix?  If so, then perhaps after you sync you can run JUnit to see if everything still passes.  I do need to make sure I can run these myself but I'm content saying this is fixed if they pass for you.  If this (and the two related bugs) seem fixed, just say the word and I will mark them all fixed.  We can clean up copyrights via another defect.
Comment 7 John Arwe CLA 2009-01-27 16:42:37 EST
After replacing my workspace with latest from head, all 245 JUnits still run
successfully (0 errors, 0 failures).

I think we are done here.  I believe 255706 at least might still need updates
to run the previously added testcases, but I need to confirm.
Comment 8 David Whiteman CLA 2009-01-27 16:59:53 EST
Fixed in CVS HEAD.
Comment 9 David Whiteman CLA 2009-08-13 17:06:29 EDT
closing fixed bug