Skip to content

CXF-8966 : Validation of nillable tags fails #1558

Open
f2par0 wants to merge 1 commit intoapache:mainfrom
Talend:CXF-8966
Open

CXF-8966 : Validation of nillable tags fails #1558
f2par0 wants to merge 1 commit intoapache:mainfrom
Talend:CXF-8966

Conversation

@f2par0
Copy link

@f2par0 f2par0 commented Dec 6, 2023

Change xml validation strategy to use the Woodstox validation when reading instead of having a reader and a writer to a nulloutput because this method is not able to handle the xsi:nil=true attributes.

Previous Algorithm :

  • Transform the input to a DOMSource Object
  • create a XMLReader from this new object and a XMLWriter to a nulloutput
  • setup the wookdstock validation on the writer if possible
  • Create a filtered Reader to remove external references
  • Copy the filterReader to the Null Writer
  • if setup fails, use XOP validation

Suggested algorithm :

  • create a filtered reader from the input to remove external references
  • setup the wookdstock validation on the reader if possible
  • call read
  • if setup fails, use XOP validation
@f2par0 f2par0 marked this pull request as draft December 7, 2023 09:14
@f2par0 f2par0 force-pushed the CXF-8966 branch 2 times, most recently from 1b8d4e0 to 39c98a0 Compare December 7, 2023 10:00
@f2par0 f2par0 marked this pull request as ready for review December 7, 2023 10:38
@reta
Copy link
Member

reta commented Dec 16, 2023

@f2par0 thank you for attempt to fix the issue, I believe the issue is identified here FasterXML/woodstox#179 and it seems like the issue is not within CXF or Woodstox but MSV

@f2par0
Copy link
Author

f2par0 commented Dec 19, 2023

Yes, thanks for finding this issue. So this PR is more a workaround to avoid to call MSV writer.

@reta
Copy link
Member

reta commented Dec 19, 2023

Yes, thanks for finding this issue. So this PR is more a workaround to avoid to call MSV writer.

I would prefer the wait for fix to come from upstream if possible and not merge any workarounds

@ppalaga
Copy link
Contributor

ppalaga commented Jan 5, 2024

FasterXML/woodstox#179 is a Woodstox issue after all - see FasterXML/woodstox#179 (comment)

@ppalaga
Copy link
Contributor

ppalaga commented Jan 14, 2024

@NiasSt90
Copy link

Why not change in general the approach to run the validation on reader-side instead of on a (dummy) writer during a additional copy process?

I like the approach of these PR here to change.....

I've tried it by myself here in a similar way.

@ppalaga
Copy link
Contributor

ppalaga commented Feb 29, 2024

Sorry for the delay, FasterXML/woodstox#187 got stuck due to legal issues with the CLA. I hope those get resolved soonish.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

4 participants