Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-jakarta-avalon-phoenix-dev-archive@apache.org Received: (qmail 1693 invoked from network); 1 Jul 2002 01:55:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nagoya.betaversion.org) (192.18.49.131) by 209.66.108.5 with SMTP; 1 Jul 2002 01:55:23 -0000 Received: (qmail 29070 invoked by uid 97); 1 Jul 2002 01:55:40 -0000 Delivered-To: qmlist-jakarta-archive-avalon-phoenix-dev@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 29054 invoked by uid 97); 1 Jul 2002 01:55:40 -0000 Mailing-List: contact avalon-phoenix-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Help: List-Post: List-Id: "Avalon-Phoenix Developers List" Reply-To: "Avalon-Phoenix Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list avalon-phoenix-dev@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 29042 invoked by uid 98); 1 Jul 2002 01:55:39 -0000 X-Antivirus: nagoya (v4198 created Apr 24 2002) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" From: Peter Royal To: "Avalon-Phoenix Developers List" Subject: Re: Configuration Validation Date: Sun, 30 Jun 2002 21:51:12 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.4.1 References: <200206280131.39380.proyal@apache.org> <200206302119.33747.proyal@apache.org> <200207011137.08184.peter@apache.org> In-Reply-To: <200207011137.08184.peter@apache.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-Id: <200206302151.12184.proyal@apache.org> X-Spam-Rating: 209.66.108.5 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: 209.66.108.5 1.6.2 0/1000/N On Sunday 30 June 2002 09:37 pm, Peter Donald wrote: > works for me. Or Maybe even "Blockame-schema.[xsd|rng|...]" just to avoid > collisions with other stuff Stephen is working on - then again it may not > be that important, not sure. I'll do that. The question is the extension. I'm wavering between having a hardcoded list of schema-types to extension vs having the extension included in the blockinfo. > Alternatively you could import the schema via xdoclet. ie Have schema sit > side-by-side block java file and during XDoclet process it gets merged into > BlockInfo descriptor. Then again thats a bit ugly and painful todoso maybe > separate file is best. I've been sitting here pondering that, and I think thats a bad idea. The individual schema validators will need the schema as an XML input, and the conversion from embedded in the blockinfo (xml) -> configuration object -> xml seems like it could be superfluous and potentially error prone. (or at least confusing, if you have an invalid schema error messages from the validator could be difficult to interpret). -pete -- peter royal -> proyal@apache.org -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: For additional commands, e-mail: