[jdom-interest] ValidityException

[Jason Hunter]

I'm thinking we should punt on this change unless we can more reliably 
report validity errors.  From what you're saying, SAX itself doesn't 
reliably tell you when there's a validity error.  Thus it'll be pretty 
hard to have JDOM deliver this information.  I don't want to see 
ValidityException have false positives or false negatives.

-jh-

Elliotte Rusty Harold wrote:
> At 12:36 PM -0700 6/17/03, Jason Hunter wrote:
> 
>> Second thing is, I'm unclear on the purpose for the public class 
>> SAXValidityException.  Couldn't it be package protected?  It's 
>> confusing especially since SAXValidityException doesn't extend 
>> ValidityException.
> 
> 
> Absolutely. This is just because I have to throw some kind of 
> SAXException due to the method signature (or perhaps a 
> RuntimeException). It doesn't need to be public.
> 
>> Third, can you be sure in BuilderErrorHandler that an error() callback 
>> means a validation error?
> 
> 
> No, you can't. For instance Crimson also reports namespace errors by 
> calling error. However, in most parsers the most common error() calls 
> are all validity errors.
> 
>> Lastly, the build() call will only throw a ValidityException if our 
>> standard BuilderErrorHandler is installed.  If they install their own, 
>> it won't happen anymore.  That seems like an unfortunate side effect.
> 
> 
> Yes. This is a really an atrocious hack. We could hack further and 
> always use our own ErrorHandler, with the option to chain ours to theirs 
> if they install one. This is all really, really messy. I don't see a 
> clean way to do any of this. If you or anyone else can think of a nicer 
> way to do any of this, it would be much appreciated.