You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to c-dev@xerces.apache.org by "Boris Kolpackov (JIRA)" <xe...@xml.apache.org> on 2008/07/16 16:01:31 UTC

[jira] Created: (XERCESC-1819) Failure to validate valid instance

Failure to validate valid instance
----------------------------------

                 Key: XERCESC-1819
                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/XERCESC-1819
             Project: Xerces-C++
          Issue Type: Bug
          Components: Validating Parser (XML Schema)
    Affects Versions: 2.8.0, 3.0.0
            Reporter: Boris Kolpackov
            Priority: Blocker
             Fix For: 3.0.0


I have a valid XML instance that validates ok with 2.8.0 but fails with current 3.0.0. The simplified version of this test case fails on both 2.8.0 and 3.0.0 so I am not sure it is a regression. The bugs looks quite nasty (seems like one of those cases where a wrong thing gets resolved and used) so we should try to fix it for 3.0.0.


-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: c-dev-unsubscribe@xerces.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: c-dev-help@xerces.apache.org


[jira] Updated: (XERCESC-1819) Failure to validate valid instance

Posted by "Boris Kolpackov (JIRA)" <xe...@xml.apache.org>.
     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/XERCESC-1819?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]

Boris Kolpackov updated XERCESC-1819:
-------------------------------------

    Attachment: test.xml
                test.xsd

The test case. Note that if the second (t:bar) or the last (bar) element name is changed then the document validates ok. So it is somehow important that they are both called bar even though one is qualified and the other is not.

> Failure to validate valid instance
> ----------------------------------
>
>                 Key: XERCESC-1819
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/XERCESC-1819
>             Project: Xerces-C++
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: Validating Parser (XML Schema)
>    Affects Versions: 2.8.0, 3.0.0
>            Reporter: Boris Kolpackov
>            Priority: Blocker
>             Fix For: 3.0.0
>
>         Attachments: test.xml, test.xsd
>
>
> I have a valid XML instance that validates ok with 2.8.0 but fails with current 3.0.0. The simplified version of this test case fails on both 2.8.0 and 3.0.0 so I am not sure it is a regression. The bugs looks quite nasty (seems like one of those cases where a wrong thing gets resolved and used) so we should try to fix it for 3.0.0.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: c-dev-unsubscribe@xerces.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: c-dev-help@xerces.apache.org


[jira] Resolved: (XERCESC-1819) Failure to validate valid instance

Posted by "Alberto Massari (JIRA)" <xe...@xml.apache.org>.
     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/XERCESC-1819?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]

Alberto Massari resolved XERCESC-1819.
--------------------------------------

       Resolution: Fixed
    Fix Version/s: 2.9.0
         Assignee: Alberto Massari

> Failure to validate valid instance
> ----------------------------------
>
>                 Key: XERCESC-1819
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/XERCESC-1819
>             Project: Xerces-C++
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: Validating Parser (XML Schema)
>    Affects Versions: 2.8.0, 3.0.0
>            Reporter: Boris Kolpackov
>            Assignee: Alberto Massari
>            Priority: Blocker
>             Fix For: 3.0.0, 2.9.0
>
>         Attachments: test.xml, test.xsd
>
>
> I have a valid XML instance that validates ok with 2.8.0 but fails with current 3.0.0. The simplified version of this test case fails on both 2.8.0 and 3.0.0 so I am not sure it is a regression. The bugs looks quite nasty (seems like one of those cases where a wrong thing gets resolved and used) so we should try to fix it for 3.0.0.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: c-dev-unsubscribe@xerces.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: c-dev-help@xerces.apache.org