cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sylvain Wallez <>
Subject Re: [cforms binding] consistency in leniency
Date Sun, 04 Jan 2004 08:47:47 GMT
Marc Portier wrote:

> While fixing up my recent 'lenient' sample...
> I noticed that leniency is not dealth with in a consistent manner 
> throughout the binding implementations:
> one binding in the pack 'ValueJXpathBinding' catches the possible 
> JXPathException and just logs them as a warning...
> I take it this try/catch attitude stems from a time when I didn't know 
> of the existance of setLenient() in JXPath :-)
> So, since
> 1/ we hapilly do use that now
> 2/ have it available as an attribute on all bindings
> 3/ and by default set leniency to true
> (and since
> 4/ I hopefully smashed the last bug in that area some minutes ago)
> I am removing the try-catch-warn approach: if the binding is set to 
> non-lenient then the consequences of that should be as obvious as 
> possible and thus thrown up in the face of the end-user (which should 
> be the testing web-app developer at that time)
> I don't think I overlooked something here, but am wide open for other 
> views and insights...

Sounds good!

> -marc=
> PS: by the way: I noticed that setting the leniency doesn't seem to 
> have any effect on Javascript objects, they seem to be lenient by 
> themselves?

That's something I once started to investigate, but quickly got lost in 
the guts of JXPath DynamicPropertyPointer and JS Scriptable properties...

It would be nice to have a consistent behaviour in this area also.


Sylvain Wallez                                  Anyware Technologies 
{ XML, Java, Cocoon, OpenSource }*{ Training, Consulting, Projects }
Orixo, the opensource XML business alliance  -

View raw message