QSF XML file backend for gnucash-gnome2-dev branch

[Josh Sled]

On Wed, 2005-01-26 at 13:22, Neil Williams wrote:

> I disagree, I prefer validation because there's no reason to implement a 
> sub-set of validation (just checking Doc-Root) when code exists to check the 
> whole. After all, you just said to use other existing methods rather than 
> implementing our own. Schema validation isn't our own, checking just the root 
> tag would be.

Apple: "is this document what I expect to process" via a string equality
check of the fully-qualified name of the root element.

Orange: re-implementing a validator.

You should still check the fully-qualified root element to see if you
should even _try_ to validate against the schema.


> I just don't feel that is sufficient. As the code is now operational, the 
> library version is satisfactory for the target and the schema is itself 
> useful for future development, I don't see any point in abandoning it further 
> down the road. If it wasn't working, I might agree with you.

I strongly believe the schema should be informative rather than used at
runtime, but I guess we'll just disagree on that; if validation is
working with a version of libxml2 that fits our platform-targeting, then
great.


> We all know XML will be edited when the needs arises, all we do is discourage 
> people from tampering with the complicated bits, like the map calculation. 

I wasn't talking about one-off debugging cases which expect looking
under the covers; it sounded earlier like your expected use-case was
hand-editing object data.  But I better understand your intent, now.

...jsled

-- 
http://asynchronous.org/ - `a=jsled; b=asynchronous.org; echo ${a}@${b}`