tksk / jing-trang

Automatically exported from code.google.com/p/jing-trang
0 stars 0 forks source link

[validator-nu] port a modification George's patch for issue 35 to the validator-nu ("Provide more information for missing required attributes/elements errors") #124

Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 9 years ago

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
I have a modification of George's patch for issue 35 for porting to the 
validator-nu branch.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by sideshowbarker on 5 Nov 2010 at 3:16

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
http://code.google.com/p/jing-trang/source/detail?r=2350
http://code.google.com/p/jing-trang/source/detail?r=2351
http://code.google.com/p/jing-trang/source/detail?r=2352

Original comment by sideshowbarker on 5 Nov 2010 at 4:23

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
Jing's validator got refactored and the error reporting was substantially 
redone.  See

http://code.google.com/p/jing-trang/source/browse/trunk/mod/pattern/src/main/com
/thaiopensource/relaxng/pattern/PatternMatcher.java

It's a pity the validate-nu branch isn't using the new code.

Original comment by jjc.jclark.com on 6 Nov 2010 at 1:12

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
Hi James,

You wrote:

[[

Jing's validator got refactored and the error reporting was substantially 
redone.  See

http://code.google.com/p/jing-trang/source/browse/trunk/mod/pattern/src/main/com
/thaiopensource/relaxng/pattern/PatternMatcher.java

It's a pity the validate-nu branch isn't using the new code.
]]

I actually wasn't aware that it had been refactored on the trunk. I can 
definitely port that code over from the trunk that -- that's clearly the right 
thing to do. But it seems like I must be looking at the wrong code or 
something, because neither the latest change to the relevant code -- r2341 -- 
nor any prior changes that have been checked into that code this  year look 
like they are fix for issue 35. But as I said in the comment I just submitted 
for issue 35, I must be missing something here. I'll look back at the code 
again.

Original comment by sideshowbarker on 6 Nov 2010 at 1:56