Yep, works for me too. THANK YOU!
From: "Constantine Georges" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Caching Schemas
Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2003 17:52:00 -0400
Hi Jeff,
Thanks!
That did the trick.
C
es/Towers Perrin)
<[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Caching Schemas
m: Constantine Georges [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, April 21, 2003 3:53 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Caching Schemas
Okay -- I have a feeling I'm not explaining my particular problem properly.
The reason I've continued it on this thread is that I think that my and
Glenn
Okay -- I have a feeling I'm not explaining my particular problem properly.
The reason I've continued it on this thread is that I think that my and
Glenn's problems are related (as well as Paul Sorenson's, from a few weeks
ago).
(See attached file: ParserTest.java)(See attached file: test.jar)(See
can only be used for schema components in the same targetNamespace
as the including schema. As Sandy pointed out, while the including schema
is being parsed, the grammar for the included stuff cannot already exist
because a grammar contains all the constructs of a given namespace.
must be used f
for resolution, and that's where I am in my
research. I will take your advice and look more into entity resolvers.
Thank you for taking the time to respond!
From: "Sandy Gao" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Caching Schemas
D
Again, thanks for sharing your thoughts with me. I'll keep you posted if I
find anything else. Please reciprocate!
From: "Constantine Georges" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Caching Schemas
Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2003 15:07:08 -
cc:
Subject: Re: Caching Schemas
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Sandy Gao" cc: (bcc: Constantine
Georges/Towers Perrin)
<[
cc:
Subject: Re: Caching
Schemas
arther and
farther ...". I've found some questionable XERCES code which I've modified
and am happy to report some progress has been made...
From: "Sandy Gao" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Caching Schemas
Date: Mo
(bcc: Constantine
Georges/Towers Perrin)
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: Caching Schemas
the parser
asks for S (by calling your entity resolver), you return an InputSource
with a Reader or InputStream in it for S.
Note that this has nothing to do with caching schemas.
Cheers,
Sandy Gao
Software Developer, IBM Canada
(1-905) 413-3255
[EMAIL PROTECTED
cationPairs;
// first try to find it in the bucket/pool, return if one is found
// SchemaGrammar grammar = findGrammar(desc);
// if (grammar != null)
// return grammar;
From: "Constantine Georges" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To:
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Glenn Barnard" cc: (bcc: Constantine
Georges/Towers Perrin)
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]
This feature works well when schemas and sub-schemas are on disk. However,
our application calls for loading schemas and sub-schemas from an XML/RPC
server, meaning that the schemas reach the client as text.
In my initial test, I have a master schema and one sub-schema. If I load the
master (to
Hi,
I want use the EntityResolver cache trick when validating a number of
documents.
The documents don't have one of the schemaLocation attributes, since I use
the property to hard-code this. The problem is that the resolveEntity will
not be called in this scenario.
Is there a trick for this?
T
17 matches
Mail list logo
