-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 69
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Silence schematron-related SXWN9000 Saxon error #241
Conversation
f3350d7
to
185c071
Compare
if (exception instanceof XPathException) { | ||
XPathException xe = (XPathException) exception; | ||
if ("SXWN9000".equals(xe.getErrorCodeLocalPart())) { | ||
return; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This could potentially silence other warnings (the error code is not specific to this particular issue).… but since these are static errors and the XSLT is statically known and under Jing’s control, I think it’s OK.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This could potentially silence other warnings (the error code is not specific to this particular issue).…
Right, but if we wanted to isolate just the “The parent axis starting at a document node will never select anything” case, then as far as I can see the only alternative would be to do string-matching against the message text — which would only work when the messages are emitted in English, but not for other locales. Right?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes, this is my understanding as well.
I made that comment for the sake of clarity, but again I think silencing all SXWN9000 is safe.
I guess this is fine. I hope a fix at the XSLT level is also available sometime. Any tools that invoke Jing with their own error handler will probably have to replicate this approach. |
Per #240 (comment) it seems there actually is. So I’ll go ahead and close this PR in favor of #244 (which does what @georgebina suggests in that comment).
Yeah, I hadn’t thought of that. That makes it a pretty suboptimal fix, so it would be great if we can agreement that the patch in #244 will work |
Fixes #240