Mailing-List: contact user-help@uima.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: user@uima.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of lou.degenaro@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.128.173 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <5334F3D7.3080508@orkash.com>
References: <532ACDA2.6020101@orkash.com>
	<CA+W_RZhVo=tKr1pU=pjTCKPdxHoBMxrpOPWwcDEVeSjxbrWMFA@mail.gmail.com>
	<53329E76.3010709@orkash.com>
	<CA+W_RZjkQprXT39WyjpH0b0+Bg_10YG54-_kr5XQuP_gsFwv2g@mail.gmail.com>
	<5332D412.7040306@orkash.com>
	<CA+W_RZh+iUC13yHpUvt74x9yBLuknVS5XrpG2ec-OtqyqNfYVg@mail.gmail.com>
	<5333B7C4.3000705@orkash.com>
	<CA+W_RZiOmyBd-9yJ=539WEY2darAAT+eja26fXbbTP6cPW_nDw@mail.gmail.com>
	<5334F3D7.3080508@orkash.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 08:24:58 -0400
Message-ID: 
 <CA+W_RZhV1M9S4y+GB6Si3XkrEW0KXf=QUO+u91gBuVcSmQZR+Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: status Lost=1 in DUCC
From: Lou DeGenaro <lou.degenaro@gmail.com>
To: user@uima.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7bdca04649def704f5a9ca29

--047d7bdca04649def704f5a9ca29
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Hi Reshu,

Very good.  It would be helpful if you could supply a small sample data
comprising "invalid XML characters" as a test case, to motivate DUCC to
detect and handle this situation more elegantly in terms of allowing the
user to recognize what's wrong.

Lou.


On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 12:00 AM, reshu.agarwal <reshu.agarwal@orkash.com>wrote:

> On 03/27/2014 08:13 PM, Lou DeGenaro wrote:
>
>> he data being sent are "values" rather than "keys" in your
>> CAS?  If so, this is not really a "best practice" for DUCC use.
>>
> Hi Lou,
>
> This is not the problem of how I send the data. My document contains some
> invalid XML characters. So, problem resolved after I applied filter for
> that.
>
> Reshu.
>

--047d7bdca04649def704f5a9ca29--