DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT <http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=8711>. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=8711 Better control over validation Summary: Better control over validation Product: XalanJ2 Version: CurrentCVS Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: Enhancement Priority: Other Component: org.apache.xml.dtm AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Currently, Xalan doesn't give us much control over when input documents are validated; to take control, one has to instantiate a parser and pass in a SAXSource rather than letting Xalan create the parser instance itself. And the current state of the world is a bit confused; I think incremental vs. non-incremental, and Xerces versus other parsers, may affect whether validation occurs or not. We should provide a better set of controls for whether DTD and/or schema validation is performed. We did, long ago -- see the commented-out -VALIDATION switch in Process.java -- but that was dropped, probably because the XSLT data model requres some info which may only be available after DTD validation. There might still be an argument for allowing DTD validation to be turned off in special cases. (Note: For performance reasons, I do _not_ currently recommend we default to schema validation being turned on. As Xerces improves the speed of their schema validator, we can reconsider that default.) (Also note: Turning off DTD validation may _NOT_ prevent an external subset from being fetched. Setting the standalone flag in the document, ditto. The standard workaround if someone Really Doesn't Want that retrieval to occur is to plug in an EntityResolver that recognizes this request and returns an empty entity. There are quibbles about how that recognition is performed, but it might be nice if we included such a resolver as a canned tool, so Process to be told to use it. On the other hand, it's unclear that this one is a Xalan issue rather than a Xerces issue.)
