On 09/27/2010 12:40 PM, Stefan Berger wrote:
Extend the nwfilter.rng schema to accept comment attributes for all protocol
types.
Signed-off-by: Stefan Berger <stef...@us.ibm.com>
+ <define name="comment-attribute">
+ <interleave>
+ <optional>
+ <attribute name="comment">
+ <ref name="comment-type"/>
+ </attribute>
+ </optional>
+ </interleave>
+ </define>
Maybe I'm not understanding rng, but what is being interleaved here? Do
things still validate if "comment-attribute" does not contain an
<interleave>?
+
+ <define name='comment-type'>
+ <data type="string">
+ <param name="pattern">[a-za-z0-9`~...@#$%\-_+=|\\:";,./
\(\)\[\]\{\}"&<>']*</param>
Since we are enforcing a maximum comment length of 256, would it make
sense to use {0,256} rather than * (or is it \{0,256\} for this flavor
of regular expression)? This explicitly leaves out tabs; I guess that's
okay. It also leaves out 8-bit bytes - could that be a problem for i18n
where people want comments with native-language accented characters?
That is, are we being too strict here? Maybe a better pattern would be
to reject specific non-printing ASCII bytes we want to avoid, assuing
you can use escape sequences like [^\001]?
--
Eric Blake ebl...@redhat.com +1-801-349-2682
Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org
--
libvir-list mailing list
libvir-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
