You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to c-users@xerces.apache.org by jhh <jh...@alcatel-lucent.com> on 2007/01/09 20:15:41 UTC

Regular expression validation problems when migrating from 2.6 to 2.7

Hello,

I have just migrated from xerces 2.6 to xerces 2.7.  I encountered
problems in 2.7 handling regular exceptions defined in an .xsd file,
with the following definition:

        <xsd:simpleType name="String20to1000by5">
                <xsd:restriction base="xsd:string">
                        <xsd:minLength value="2"/>
                        <xsd:maxLength value="4"/>
                        <xsd:pattern value="(([2-9][05])|([1-9][0-9][05])|1000)"/>
                </xsd:restriction>
        </xsd:simpleType>

When validating an XML instance document against the schema, I get
SAXParseExceptions when performing the validation (for example for
a value of 1000) that match the schema definition for the element.
This used to work with the 2.6 version.

Does anyone have any feedback on why I could be hitting these errors?

Thanks!

Jorge




Re: Regular expression validation problems when migrating from 2.6 to 2.7

Posted by Jason Stewart <ja...@gmail.com>.
Hey Alby,

On 1/12/07, Alberto Massari <am...@datadirect.com> wrote:

> One thing I noticed last week is that JIRA is now integrated with
> SVN, so if the committer writes in the check-in message the id of the
> bug in the format XERCESC-XXXX it will be associated with the bug entry.

That's actually really cool - it relieves a lot of work...

Cheers, jas.

Re: Regular expression validation problems when migrating from 2.6 to 2.7

Posted by Alberto Massari <am...@datadirect.com>.
At 10.55 12/01/2007 +0530, Jason Stewart wrote:
>Hey Alby,
>
>On 1/10/07, Alberto Massari <am...@datadirect.com> wrote:
>>Hi Jorge,
>>this should be fixed by this commit:
>>http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&revision=369417
>
>One thing I'd like to start doing once the test-suite is full
>integrated and working for everyone is to include tests in the
>test-suite that confirm bug fixes work. To help document what was
>fixed and why. But maybe this just creates more work for the
>committer...

One thing I noticed last week is that JIRA is now integrated with 
SVN, so if the committer writes in the check-in message the id of the 
bug in the format XERCESC-XXXX it will be associated with the bug entry.

Alberto 


Re: Regular expression validation problems when migrating from 2.6 to 2.7

Posted by Jason Stewart <ja...@gmail.com>.
Hey Alby,

On 1/10/07, Alberto Massari <am...@datadirect.com> wrote:
> Hi Jorge,
> this should be fixed by this commit:
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&revision=369417
>

One thing I'd like to start doing once the test-suite is full
integrated and working for everyone is to include tests in the
test-suite that confirm bug fixes work. To help document what was
fixed and why. But maybe this just creates more work for the
committer...

Cheers, jas.

Re: Regular expression validation problems when migrating from 2.6 to 2.7

Posted by Alberto Massari <am...@datadirect.com>.
Hi Jorge,
this should be fixed by this commit: 
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&revision=369417

Alberto

At 13.15 09/01/2007 -0600, jhh wrote:
>Hello,
>
>I have just migrated from xerces 2.6 to xerces 2.7.  I encountered
>problems in 2.7 handling regular exceptions defined in an .xsd file,
>with the following definition:
>
>         <xsd:simpleType name="String20to1000by5">
>                 <xsd:restriction base="xsd:string">
>                         <xsd:minLength value="2"/>
>                         <xsd:maxLength value="4"/>
>                         <xsd:pattern 
> value="(([2-9][05])|([1-9][0-9][05])|1000)"/>
>                 </xsd:restriction>
>         </xsd:simpleType>
>
>When validating an XML instance document against the schema, I get
>SAXParseExceptions when performing the validation (for example for
>a value of 1000) that match the schema definition for the element.
>This used to work with the 2.6 version.
>
>Does anyone have any feedback on why I could be hitting these errors?
>
>Thanks!
>
>Jorge