A valid question. When I started I had no intention to re-invent the wheel,
but first spent considerable time investigating the existing solutions. I
could not find one that met my criteria: easy to understand and use, fast
and easily able to provide feedback while validating.
While building a pro
Hi,
Honestly, I didn't expect this answer.
Writing an XML validator from scratch sounds like a bad idea when there are
several already existing (Qt, Xerces c++, libxml2 etc...) with already many
man-days invested, hundreds of projects using them and years of bug fixes.
May I ask why you chose to r
On Saturday 09 January 2016 14:05:41 Leon Vinken wrote:
> In the past we have had several complaints about loading large MusicXML
> files taking too long and not providing any any feedback.
I'd vote for it.
And, to avoid the problems associated with having custom built stuff of our
own, how abo
Yes, I wrote it myself from scratch. Currently about 4500 lines of code. It
understands just enough of the W3C XML schema language to correctly validate
MusicXML.
--
View this message in context:
http://dev-list.musescore.org/Replacing-Qt-XML-validator-by-custom-validator-tp7579577p7579579.html
Hi Leon,
Did you wrote the validator yourself? If no, what's the basis or the lib
you used?
lasconic
2016-01-09 22:05 GMT+01:00 Leon Vinken :
> In the past we have had several complaints about loading large MusicXML
> files
> taking too long and not providing any any feedback. This is caused by
In the past we have had several complaints about loading large MusicXML files
taking too long and not providing any any feedback. This is caused by the Qt
XML validator used: it is not very quick and it does not enable any
feedback.
To get a feel for possible improvements I have built a prototype
