Dave, if you try to validate again, does it work now?

On 1 Sep 2010, at 14:27, Jonathan Warren wrote:

> Hi Dave
> 
> Thanks for the feedback!
> 
> I'll look into caching again on the validation - I've previously put in all 
> the standard headers etc to prevent caching but maybe I have to resort to 
> adding a unique parameter for each response as well to avoid caching. I've 
> not really experienced any problems with caching recently myself.
> 
> With regards to DSN being invalid when stated in the sources document I agree 
> it's a bit of a usability issue so I've now changed it so that the registry 
> will not complain about this and tolerate it both for 1.53E and 1.6E 
> specifications. Putting DSN validation is on my todo list - but it's very 
> little gain in my opinion as it's simple and not got much to validate (as 
> apposed to the sources document) and is also completely super-seeded by the 
> sources document. The registry and DAS in general is getting more and more 
> dependent on a valid sources document (ensembl works much more smoothly with 
> it to name one example and in the very near future people can register many 
> sources at once using the sources document in the registry and the sources 
> will be auto updating to show any changes in the server). So for this reason 
> the sources document should be encouraged as much as possible over DSN. If 
> others have a strong opinion about DSNs being listed by the registry in 
> sources capab!
 ilities and validated then let me know and I'll bump it up my list of things 
to do.
> 
> On 27 Aug 2010, at 15:54, Andy Jenkinson wrote:
> 
>> There is some caching going on in the registry which I've never got to the 
>> bottom of (HTTP caching is quite hard to debug!), but it should sort itself 
>> out.
>> 
>> Regarding the dsn thing, I don't think we ever really decided whether it 
>> should be a valid capability to report in the sources document, but it isn't 
>> in the registry's list and so newer versions of 1.53E proserver don't report 
>> it. However, since "das1:sources" -is- reported by servers in 1.6 and the 
>> DAS registry itself (because the query_uri has a specific function), my 
>> personal view is that we should allow reporting of dsn for 1.53 too. Jon?
>> 
>> On 27 Aug 2010, at 15:07, Dave Messina wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi everybody,
>>> 
>>> After receiving an automated notice that my DAS 1.53E servers are scheduled 
>>> for deletion, I'm trying to bring them into compliance. I'm not sure 
>>> exactly how to fix the validation issues, though, so I'm here to ask for 
>>> help.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 1. sources
>>> 
>>> When validating my server, the DAS registry reports this error:
>>> 
>>> capability is stated for this server but is not valid or 
>>> provided.validating http://das.sbc.su.se:9000//das/sources 
>>> RegReportErrorHandler.Error Line Number:4 column number:467 attribute 
>>> "type" has a bad value. Possible values are: 
>>> das1:alignment,das1:component,das1:cors,das1:dna,das1:entry_points,das1:error-segment,das1:feature-by-id,das1:features,das1:interaction,das1:maxbins,das1:sequence,das1:sources,das1:structure,das1:stylesheet,das1:supercomponent,das1:types,das1:unknown-feature,das1:unknown-segment
>>> 
>>> 
>>> My DAS server does provide a sources response, including capabilities:
>>> 
>>>     http://das.sbc.su.se:9000//das/sources
>>> 
>>> But I'm not sure why it's invalid.
>>> 
>>> The capability types my server returns are:
>>> 
>>> das1:dsn
>>> das1:features
>>> das1:stylesheet
>>> 
>>> das1:dsn isn't in the list possible values; is it no longer valid?
>>> 
>>> Otherwise, I wonder if this is because I'm running an ancient version of 
>>> ProServer (v463).
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 2. stylesheet
>>> 
>>> When validating, the registry reports this error:
>>> 
>>> capability was stated for this server but is either not present or 
>>> valid.validating http://das.sbc.su.se:9000//das/hmmtop/stylesheet 
>>> RegReportErrorHandler.Error Line Number:9 column number:17 tag name "FONT" 
>>> is not allowed. Possible tag names are: 
>>> <BGCOLOR>,<BUMP>,<HEIGHT>,<LABEL>,<LINEWIDTH> RegReportErrorHandler.Error 
>>> Line Number:18 column number:17 tag name "FONT" is not allowed. Possible 
>>> tag names are: <BGCOLOR>,<BUMP>,<HEIGHT>,<LABEL>,<LINEWIDTH> 
>>> RegReportErrorHandler.Error Line Number:27 column number:17 tag name "FONT" 
>>> is not allowed. Possible tag names are: 
>>> <BGCOLOR>,<BUMP>,<HEIGHT>,<LABEL>,<LINEWIDTH> the document is NOT valid.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> I've removed that tag from the stylesheet and verified that my server is no 
>>> longer presenting it:
>>> 
>>>     http://das.sbc.su.se:9000/das1/hmmtop/stylesheet
>>> 
>>> However, when I try to revalidate, the registry reports the same error.
>>> 
>>> Is there perhaps caching going on?
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Thanks for any suggestions,
>>> Dave
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> DAS mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> http://lists.open-bio.org/mailman/listinfo/das
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> DAS mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://lists.open-bio.org/mailman/listinfo/das
> 
> Jonathan Warren
> Senior Developer and DAS coordinator
> blog: http://biodasman.wordpress.com/
> [email protected]
> Ext: 2314
> Telephone: 01223 492314
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> The Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute is operated by Genome ResearchLimited, a 
> charity registered in England with number 1021457 and acompany registered in 
> England with number 2742969, whose registeredoffice is 215 Euston Road, 
> London, NW1 2BE.


_______________________________________________
DAS mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.open-bio.org/mailman/listinfo/das

Reply via email to