On Nov 21, 2008, at 9:47 AM, Max Rydahl Andersen wrote: > Right now redirect view-id can't use EL expression's according to > the XSD > > Causing xml validators to complain (https://jira.jboss.org/jira/browse/JBIDE-3248 > ) > because of the XSD having a weird limitation as reported in https://jira.jboss.org/jira/browse/JBSEAM-3741 > > I assume that .xsd change was not what you actually wanted ? I'll fix this for 2.1.1.CR2. It looks like the components.xml stricter typing made it to pages.xml, but without the addition of allowing EL expressions._______________________________________________ seam-dev mailing list seam-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/seam-dev

On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 17:07:08 +0100, Jay Balunas <tech4j(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: > I wondering why this was not caught in our release testing - I > would assume that it is because none of the examples and/or current > JBDS tests strike this issue. We will look further into this and > try to come up with a good way to verify. Enable schema validation in a test run and it should reveal it - this isn't really a JBDS specific issue, it would fail in any validating xml editor.

Note: Seam's xml is extremely nice and strict compared to other projects like e.g. ESB where the DTD/XSD is basically useless since anything can be nested in anything according to the XSD but the runtime doesn't support that and in other places it is stated that the attribute is a number/string etc. but actually they have support for ${} property style replacement too causing us to disable validation and do custom hacks around the xsd to have the editing not fail on valid files...a paain! So big kudos to seam XSD files - but remember to use them for validation once in a while and we should avoid degenerating into what ESB XSD's are ;) /max > > -Jay > > > On Nov 21, 2008, at 10:56 AM, Norman Richards wrote: > >> >> On Nov 21, 2008, at 9:47 AM, Max Rydahl Andersen wrote: >> >>> Right now redirect view-id can't use EL expression's according to >>> the XSD >>> >>> Causing xml validators to complain (https://jira.jboss.org/jira/browse/JBIDE-3248 >>> ) >>> because of the XSD having a weird limitation as reported in https://jira.jboss.org/jira/browse/JBSEAM-3741 >>> >>> I assume that .xsd change was not what you actually wanted ? >> >> I'll fix this for 2.1.1.CR2. It looks like the components.xml >> stricter typing made it to pages.xml, but without the addition of >> allowing EL >> expressions._______________________________________________ >> seam-dev mailing list >> seam-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/seam-dev > -- /max

On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 11:20 AM, Jay Balunas <tech4j(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: > > On Nov 21, 2008, at 11:13 AM, Max Rydahl Andersen wrote: > >> On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 17:07:08 +0100, Jay Balunas <tech4j(a)gmail.com&gt; >> wrote: >> >>> I wondering why this was not caught in our release testing - I >>> would >>> assume that it is because none of the examples and/or current >>> JBDS tests >>> strike this issue. We will look further into this and try to >>> come up with a >>> good way to verify. >> >> Enable schema validation in a test run and it should reveal it - >> this >> isn't really a JBDS specific issue, it would fail in any validating >> xml editor. > > Part of our release-process includes executing the testsuite and > build with > validate/xml=true. We are looking into why this slipped through. I speculate that we don't use EL in a redirect element anywhere in the examples. If that is true, you have your answer. Let's add one. -Dan

>>>> I wondering why this was not caught in our release testing - I would >>>> assume that it is because none of the examples and/or current JBDS >>>> tests >>>> strike this issue. We will look further into this and try to come up >>>> with a >>>> good way to verify. >>> >>> Enable schema validation in a test run and it should reveal it - this >>> isn't really a JBDS specific issue, it would fail in any validating >>> xml editor. >> >> Part of our release-process includes executing the testsuite and build >> with >> validate/xml=true. We are looking into why this slipped through. > > I speculate that we don't use EL in a redirect element anywhere in the > examples. If that is true, you have your answer. Let's add one.

> Btw, the validateConfiguration Ant target in a seam-gen app is broken > because we are not copying validate.xml. I will add that for CR2. Great - is there a jira for fixing the build?

Even though it deviates from semantics, it is correct to use a string in the from-action. That string may be used in the action attribute of the UICommand component. <h:commandButton action="go" value="Go"/> <navigation from-action="go"> <rule> <redirect view-id="/nextPage.xhtml"/> </rule> </navigation> -Dan On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 9:48 AM, Jozef Hartinger <jharting(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > It looks like the validation mechanism used during release testing for > validating configuration files is broken. With deprecated > "validate.xml=true" option it does not work and validateall target should be > used instead. I am going to update this target since it does not cover all > the examples. > > According to pages.xml schema, only EL expression is allowed in > "from-action" attribute of navigation element in pages.xml however in > seambay example plain string is used. Is this the problem of the example or > the schema is too restrictive? > -- Dan Allen Software consultant | Author of Seam in Action http://mojavelinux.com http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction NOTE: While I make a strong effort to keep up with my email on a daily basis, personal or other work matters can sometimes keep me away from my email. If you contact me, but don't hear back for more than a week, it is very likely that I am excessively backlogged or the message was caught in the spam filters. Please don't hesitate to resend a message if you feel that it did not reach my attention.

This is what we call a "bug" - they do happen in products outside JBDS where we don't have such excellent engineers as you :p

Actually, I think this was already reported in JIRA?

On 22 Nov 2008, at 03:13, Max Rydahl Andersen wrote: > On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 17:07:08 +0100, Jay Balunas <tech4j(a)gmail.com&gt; > wrote: > >> I wondering why this was not caught in our release testing - I would >> assume that it is because none of the examples and/or current JBDS >> tests strike this issue. We will look further into this and try to >> come up with a good way to verify. > > Enable schema validation in a test run and it should reveal it - this > isn't really a JBDS specific issue, it would fail in any validating > xml editor. > > Note: Seam's xml is extremely nice and strict compared to other > projects like > e.g. ESB where the DTD/XSD is basically useless since anything can be > nested > in anything according to the XSD but the runtime doesn't support that > and > in other places it is stated that the attribute is a number/string etc. > but > actually they have support for ${} property style replacement too > causing us > to disable validation and do custom hacks around the xsd to have the > editing > not fail on valid files...a paain! > > So big kudos to seam XSD files - but remember to use them for > validation once > in a while and we should avoid degenerating into what ESB XSD's are ;) > > /max > >> >> -Jay >> >> >> On Nov 21, 2008, at 10:56 AM, Norman Richards wrote: >> >>> >>> On Nov 21, 2008, at 9:47 AM, Max Rydahl Andersen wrote: >>> >>>> Right now redirect view-id can't use EL expression's according to >>>> the XSD >>>> >>>> Causing xml validators to complain >>>> (https://jira.jboss.org/jira/browse/JBIDE-3248) >>>> because of the XSD having a weird limitation as reported in >>>> https://jira.jboss.org/jira/browse/JBSEAM-3741 >>>> >>>> I assume that .xsd change was not what you actually wanted ? >>> >>> I'll fix this for 2.1.1.CR2. It looks like the components.xml >>> stricter typing made it to pages.xml, but without the addition of >>> allowing EL >>> expressions._______________________________________________ >>> seam-dev mailing list >>> seam-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/seam-dev >> > > > > --/max > _______________________________________________ > seam-dev mailing list > seam-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/seam-dev