Markos is correct, if a/ element is inside root element than, root has a
complex type and is not a simple type which anysimpleType represents. This
should make the validation failing in the example from bug #912722 even if lax
is specified. So this doesn't fix the bug #912722, at least the
Review: Needs Fixing
The module works great.
There is room for improvement regarding its documentation.
There are many ways to represent JSON data in XML - There are two ways to
represent JSON data in XML:
- bullet 1 (John Snelson's format)
- bullet 2 (JSON)
Then add two examples, you can take
Markos Zaharioudakis has proposed merging lp:~zorba-coders/zorba/markos-scratch
into lp:zorba.
Requested reviews:
Markos Zaharioudakis (markos-za)
For more details, see:
https://code.launchpad.net/~zorba-coders/zorba/markos-scratch/+merge/89646
fix for bug #866932 (string pool not empty on
Review: Approve
--
https://code.launchpad.net/~zorba-coders/zorba/markos-scratch/+merge/89646
Your team Zorba Coders is subscribed to branch lp:zorba.
--
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~zorba-coders
Post to : zorba-coders@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe :
The proposal to merge lp:~zorba-coders/zorba/markos-scratch into lp:zorba has
been updated.
Status: Needs review = Approved
For more details, see:
https://code.launchpad.net/~zorba-coders/zorba/markos-scratch/+merge/89646
--
Validation queue starting for merge proposal.
Log at:
http://zorbatest.lambda.nu:8080/remotequeue/markos-scratch-2012-01-23T10-18-01.711Z/log.html
--
https://code.launchpad.net/~zorba-coders/zorba/markos-scratch/+merge/89646
Your team Zorba Coders is subscribed to branch lp:zorba.
--
Mailing
Ghislain, yes, what you say makes sense, given the current
implementation. But the current API reflects our long-term goal of
separating zorba from the store (into separate libraries). The
application may link with several stores and start zorba with a
different store each time. In this scenario,
Validation queue job markos-scratch-2012-01-23T10-18-01.711Z is finished. The
final status was:
All tests succeeded!
--
https://code.launchpad.net/~zorba-coders/zorba/markos-scratch/+merge/89646
Your team Zorba Coders is subscribed to branch lp:zorba.
--
Mailing list:
The proposal to merge lp:~zorba-coders/zorba/markos-scratch into lp:zorba has
been updated.
Status: Approved = Merged
For more details, see:
https://code.launchpad.net/~zorba-coders/zorba/markos-scratch/+merge/89646
--
I have changed the global zstrings in staitc_context to const char*
strings.
** Changed in: zorba
Status: New = Fix Committed
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Zorba
Coders, which is the registrant for Zorba.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/866932
Title:
No, the statement There are many ways to represent JSON data in XML is
correct as it is. There *are* *many* ways: Zorba only implements *two* of
those *many* ways.
Adding *two* examples is too much. API documentation isn't supposed to be the
primary documentation.
--
Review: Needs Fixing
I think William is right. We should have a couple of examples which help the
user to get started with this module. Those could either be inline in the text
or links generated using the @example xqdoc tag.
The serialize functions should be annotated %ann:streamable because
This looks really good, clean, and professional.
The links to the latest language APIs are kind of broken but that seems
related to bug https://bugs.launchpad.net/zorba/+bug/919755.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Zorba
Coders, which is the registrant for
Review: Approve
--
https://code.launchpad.net/~zorba-coders/zorba/remove_old_json/+merge/89770
Your team Zorba Coders is subscribed to branch lp:zorba/data-converters-module.
--
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~zorba-coders
Post to : zorba-coders@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe :
Review: Approve
--
https://code.launchpad.net/~zorba-coders/zorba/remove_old_json/+merge/89770
Your team Zorba Coders is subscribed to branch lp:zorba/data-converters-module.
--
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~zorba-coders
Post to : zorba-coders@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe :
The proposal to merge lp:~zorba-coders/zorba/remove_old_json into
lp:zorba/data-converters-module has been updated.
Status: Needs review = Approved
For more details, see:
https://code.launchpad.net/~zorba-coders/zorba/remove_old_json/+merge/89770
--
Validation queue starting for merge proposal.
Log at:
http://zorbatest.lambda.nu:8080/remotequeue/remove_old_json-2012-01-23T19-46-43.722Z/log.html
--
https://code.launchpad.net/~zorba-coders/zorba/remove_old_json/+merge/89770
Your team Zorba Coders is subscribed to branch
The attempt to merge lp:~zorba-coders/zorba/remove_old_json into
lp:zorba/data-converters-module failed. Below is the output from the failed
tests.
CMake Error at /home/ceej/zo/testing/zorbatest/tester/TarmacLander.cmake:274
(message):
Validation queue job
The proposal to merge lp:~zorba-coders/zorba/remove_old_json into
lp:zorba/data-converters-module has been updated.
Status: Approved = Needs review
For more details, see:
https://code.launchpad.net/~zorba-coders/zorba/remove_old_json/+merge/89770
--
** Changed in: zorba
Importance: Undecided = Critical
** Changed in: zorba
Status: New = In Progress
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Zorba
Coders, which is the registrant for Zorba.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/919755
Title:
Make Zorba APIs more
I've pushed a fix for https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/919757 as well,
do you like it?
I also disabled the jsoniq slide
On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 8:17 PM, Matthias Brantner
919...@bugs.launchpad.net wrote:
This looks really good, clean, and professional.
The links to the latest language APIs are
I have committed a fix for it that you can see at
http://zorba.my28msec.com/html/documentation/
For instance:
http://zorba.my28msec.com/html/documentation/2.1.0/c/datastructures
If you agree with this fix, please mark this bug as fix committed.
** Changed in: zorba
Assignee: (unassigned) =
The menu looks awesome. Very clean. However, the links only seem to work
for C++ and C. The other APIs kind of work but always show the C++ index
page. That's somehow confusing.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Zorba
Coders, which is the registrant for Zorba.
Review: Needs Fixing
1) Should be possible to call json:serialize(json:parse(VALID_JSON))
where VALID_JSON is any valid JSON string
see failing test test/rbkt/zorba/json/json-snelson-serialize-parse
added bug lp:920717
2) array and object closed prematurely in json:parse
see failing tests
Public bug reported:
- there is no @project tag for the new json.xq module: as a result, in the
XQDoc documentation is generated in the www.zorba-xquery.com/modules/converters
instead of data processing/data converters
Please add a @project data processing/data converters in the module
Public bug reported:
Comment nodes should be ignored by json:serialize function: please see failing
tests:
- test/rbkt/zorba/json/json-snelson-serialize-object-03
- test/rbkt/zorba/json/json-snelson-serialize-array-12
For instance, test json-snelson-serialize-object-03:
import module namespace
Public bug reported:
When trying to parsing a valid JSON string with invalid JSON option parameter
the error raised is:
http://www.w3.org/2005/xqt-errors:XPST0003:
In order to raise a more useful error message saying that the options are not
set correctly.
Please note that setting the wrong
Public bug reported:
Parsing an empty value has wrong behavior for both JSON mappings (Snelson and
JSON-ML).
Please see failing tests:
- test/rbkt/zorba/json/json-snelson-empty-value
- test/rbkt/zorba/json/json-jsonml-empty-value
For instance in zorba/json/json-snelson-empty-value.xq:
import
Public bug reported:
the items object and array are closed prematurely when json:parse is called.
Please see added tests:
- json-snelson-parse-array-06
- json-snelson-parse-array-07
For instance the result of test json-snelson-parse-array-06:
import module namespace json = http://www.zorba-
Public bug reported:
Should be possible to call json:serialize(json:parse(VALID_JSON))
where VALID_JSON is any valid JSON string
see added failing test test/rbkt/zorba/json/json-snelson-serialize-parse:
import module namespace
json=http://www.zorba-xquery.com/modules/converters/json;;
declare
r10618 contains all the tests mentioned above.
The tests are passing because they are marked as EXPECTED_FAILURES.
--
https://code.launchpad.net/~zorba-coders/zorba/feature-json_parser/+merge/89616
Your team Zorba Coders is subscribed to branch lp:zorba.
--
Mailing list:
Why did you mark them as EXPECTED_FAILURE if they're not expected to fail?
Presumably, you *want* them fixed, right?
--
https://code.launchpad.net/~zorba-coders/zorba/feature-json_parser/+merge/89616
Your team Zorba Coders is subscribed to branch lp:zorba.
--
Mailing list:
EXPECTED_FAILURE does *not* mean negative test. It means this is broken, we
know it's broken, and we're working on it. That's why you have to supply a bug
number to the macro. It probably should be renamed KNOWN_BUG.
--
It means known bug for things that are in the trunk. If it's on a branch (as
this is), then either (1) it will be fixed before it's merged into the trunk
(at which point the EXPECTED_FAILURE will have to be removed since it will no
longer be failing -- which begs my question of, Why put it in
** Branch linked: lp:~zorba-coders/zorba/feature-json_parser
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Zorba
Coders, which is the registrant for Zorba.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/920724
Title:
json 2.0 bug: XQDoc issues
Status in Zorba - The XQuery Processor:
** Changed in: zorba
Status: New = In Progress
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Zorba
Coders, which is the registrant for Zorba.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/920724
Title:
json 2.0 bug: XQDoc issues
Status in Zorba - The XQuery Processor:
In
Hmm... valid points. I think there's some value in using EXPECTED_FAILURE()
anyway, since it documents the relationship to new bugs that are filed.
It does introduce the possibility of unintentionally merging a new bug onto the
trunk, but the diff will clearly show a new EXPECTED_FAILURE()
It means known bug for things that are in the trunk. If it's on a branch
(as this is), then either (1) it will be fixed before it's merged into the
trunk (at which point the EXPECTED_FAILURE will have to be removed since it
will no longer be failing -- which begs my question of, Why put it in
Chris Hillery wrote: I think there's some value in using EXPECTED_FAILURE()
anyway, since it documents the relationship to new bugs that are filed.
The relationship to new bugs *from* ___?
--
https://code.launchpad.net/~zorba-coders/zorba/feature-json_parser/+merge/89616
Your team Zorba
Documents the relationship of the newly-added failing tests to the bugs
tracking those issues.
--
https://code.launchpad.net/~zorba-coders/zorba/feature-json_parser/+merge/89616
Your team Zorba Coders is subscribed to branch lp:zorba.
--
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~zorba-coders
Post
IMO, you didn't *need* to add any comment to the merge proposal other than
Bugs filed -- I can read the bugs myself.
Sorin wrote: Keep in mind that I have spent my time in order to give you a
hand in pointing out the issues I found.
It's all of our job to review each others' code under the New
@Chris: Hmmm... again, because this is a branch and no Zorba user will ever see
this stuff, it's at best only marginally useful.
--
https://code.launchpad.net/~zorba-coders/zorba/feature-json_parser/+merge/89616
Your team Zorba Coders is subscribed to branch lp:zorba.
--
Mailing list:
Paul, let me ask you something: are you sure you are not missing the point?
IMHO the point is to fix the issues that were raised ASAP.
I have spent my time in order to give as many details as possible in order to
fix them ASAP.
Also I have committed a fix in the branch for one of the opened
IMO, you didn't *need* to add any comment to the merge proposal other than
Bugs filed -- I can read the bugs myself.
FYI: Matthias asked me (in a separate email discussion) to add a small review
of the issues I fount in the merge proposal: please take this issue with him.
Sorin wrote: Keep in
No, the point is *not* to fix this issues ASAP. The feature is not a
high-priority feature, so there's no reason to do this ASAP. My *only* point
was why you added EXPECTED_FAILURE lines to the CMakeLists.txt file -- that's
it.
But it's moot now since I've removed all the new
Chris Hillery has proposed merging lp:~zorba-coders/zorba/disable-sc3-test into
lp:zorba.
Requested reviews:
Chris Hillery (ceejatec)
Paul J. Lucas (paul-lucas)
For more details, see:
https://code.launchpad.net/~zorba-coders/zorba/disable-sc3-test/+merge/89809
The test case sc3_ex3 depends
Review: Approve
--
https://code.launchpad.net/~zorba-coders/zorba/disable-sc3-test/+merge/89809
Your team Zorba Coders is subscribed to branch lp:zorba.
--
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~zorba-coders
Post to : zorba-coders@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe :
Review: Approve
I'll take your word for it.
--
https://code.launchpad.net/~zorba-coders/zorba/disable-sc3-test/+merge/89809
Your team Zorba Coders is subscribed to branch lp:zorba.
--
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~zorba-coders
Post to : zorba-coders@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe :
The proposal to merge lp:~zorba-coders/zorba/disable-sc3-test into lp:zorba has
been updated.
Status: Needs review = Approved
For more details, see:
https://code.launchpad.net/~zorba-coders/zorba/disable-sc3-test/+merge/89809
--
Validation queue starting for merge proposal.
Log at:
http://zorbatest.lambda.nu:8080/remotequeue/disable-sc3-test-2012-01-24T01-02-59.785Z/log.html
--
https://code.launchpad.net/~zorba-coders/zorba/disable-sc3-test/+merge/89809
Your team Zorba Coders is subscribed to branch lp:zorba.
--
No, the point is *not* to fix this issues ASAP. The feature is not a high-
priority feature, so there's no reason to do this ASAP. My *only* point was
why you added EXPECTED_FAILURE lines to the CMakeLists.txt file -- that's it.
But it's moot now since I've removed all the new
Your test in illegal XQuery: you need a return before the
json:parse(). Once the return is added, the test fails with an invalid
schema validation error which is correct.
This test wrong and this bug is bogus and should be closed.
** Changed in: zorba
Status: New = Invalid
--
You
Validation queue job disable-sc3-test-2012-01-24T01-02-59.785Z is finished. The
final status was:
All tests succeeded!
--
https://code.launchpad.net/~zorba-coders/zorba/disable-sc3-test/+merge/89809
Your team Zorba Coders is subscribed to branch lp:zorba.
--
Mailing list:
The proposal to merge lp:~zorba-coders/zorba/disable-sc3-test into lp:zorba has
been updated.
Status: Approved = Merged
For more details, see:
https://code.launchpad.net/~zorba-coders/zorba/disable-sc3-test/+merge/89809
--
The proposal to merge lp:~zorba-coders/zorba/remove_old_json into
lp:zorba/data-converters-module has been updated.
Status: Needs review = Approved
For more details, see:
https://code.launchpad.net/~zorba-coders/zorba/remove_old_json/+merge/89770
--
Renamed the tests to conform to all the rest, i.e., contain parse or
serialize in the test name. Also, again, the second test is invalid
XQuery since it's missing a return.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Zorba
Coders, which is the registrant for Zorba.
Validation queue job remove_old_json-2012-01-24T01-34-37.367Z is finished. The
final status was:
All tests succeeded!
--
https://code.launchpad.net/~zorba-coders/zorba/remove_old_json/+merge/89770
Your team Zorba Coders is subscribed to branch lp:zorba/data-converters-module.
--
Mailing list:
The JSON grammar is not as pedantic as I would like, but it looks like a
JSON text must be exactly an object or an array.
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4627
So an empty string is not a valid instance of JSON.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Zorba
Coders,
58 matches
Mail list logo
