Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 9 years ago
Solution:
1. Allow only numbers (or nothing) as TYPE tag content when it comes from the
types command
2. Allow only label (or nothing) as TYPE tag content when it comes from the
features command
3. As far as remove support for all deprecated stuff... I will wait for some
more discussion about it.
Classes affected:
1. DasTypeE: serialize methods now include a boolean parameter featuresCommand
that indicates whether or not they were called from the features command.
2. DasFeatureE: serialize method uses DasTypeE serialization with true for the
featuresCommand
3. DasCommandManager: typesCommandAllTypes and typesCommandSpecificSegment use
the DasTypeE serialization method with false for the featuresCommand.
typesCommandSpecificSegment method does not serialize the attribute type for
the SEGMENT ELEMENT because it is not supported for the RelaxNG
Original comment by leylaj...@gmail.com
on 11 Aug 2010 at 2:34
More on "remove support for deprecated"
MyDas will support deprecated attributes and responses as far as it is in
accordance to RelaxNG schemas.
DasRegistry validator will allow it as well, with a deprecated warning.
On 12/08/2010 10:35, Jonathan Warren wrote:
> ok I've set up a warning for this in the code which will come up with a valid
types but with warning next to it in red. Will have to go through the spec and
find all the pink bits and do this for both 1.6 and 1.5 spec.
>
> On 11 Aug 2010, at 15:33, Andy Jenkinson wrote:
>
>> On 11 Aug 2010, at 14:38, Leyla Garcia wrote:
>>
>>> On 11/08/2010 14:18, Andy Jenkinson wrote:
>>>> Deprecated means to me that it is permissible but not expected. It should
be possible to register a source with it in the response, otherwise it would be
"removed" in the spec (removed elements are no longer permissible). IMO MyDas
should not be providing this or any other deprecated attribute, but the
registry should tolerate it, with a "deprecation warning" on the validation
page if possible.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Mmm, If MyDas or any other should not support any deprecated thing, why not
to remove it from the spec? I understand "deprecated" means "still allowed but
be careful it will be probably removed in the next spec". So I think we should
still support what is deprecated, or not? Supporting deprecated could makes
transition easier for clients, or not?
>>
>> Well that was the idea... we are looking into allowing it in the RNG but
having a warning on the validation page.
Original comment by leylaj...@gmail.com
on 12 Aug 2010 at 12:43
Original comment by leylaj...@gmail.com
on 25 Feb 2011 at 12:03
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
leylaj...@gmail.com
on 11 Aug 2010 at 1:21