geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jacek Laskowski <>
Subject o.a.g.client.Launcher and its LocalEntityResolver
Date Fri, 26 Sep 2003 11:55:21 GMT

Yesterday I worked on the sample files Jeremy had sent recently and the 
problem with xml parsing hit me again. That's because I worked offline, 
so LocalEntityResolver wasn't able to handle and 
They're not file:// urls and are not stored in Geronimo's local store of 
schema files, so when Geronimo couldn't resolve it it handed it over to 
a XML parser that in turn tried to fetch the files from the original 

Currently, Geronimo can resolve only the most known schemas, but I think 
we should introduce a configuration file where a user will be able to 
map a publicId to systemId. That solution would have at least two 
benefits over the present LocalEntityResolver:

   1. it would differentiate between and

   2. a user wouldn't have to copy a schema to the schemas' directory, 
but would have it elsewhere

Here's a bit more explanation:

The 1st benefit is crucial as now Geronimo looks up a schema by 
stripping off the last part of systemId (e.g. --> xml.xsd) and tries to get at the file in 
the local repository. Doing so, it doesn't care about the location of 
the systemId, so and point to the same file - xml.xsd.

The 2nd one makes working offline a bit easier. Beside what's already 
said we could map any URL to a local file and wouldn't have to change 
anything, but the mapping file.

If we all agree with the outlined solution, LocalEntityResolver's ctor 
would change its signature and accept a file reference to the 
configuration file instead of directory.

How do I handle the parsing - xmlbeans, xbeans or what?

Also, shouldn't o.a.g.xml.deployment.EntityResolverTest (core module) 
change its name to o.a.g.xml.deployment.LocalEntityResolverTest? I'm 
going to create a few unit tests, but it would be much easier if I could 
already be working on the class with the valid name. Am I supposed to 
send a patch for it?


View raw message