Account Options

  1. Sign in
The old Google Groups will be going away soon, but your browser is incompatible with the new version.
Google Groups Home
« Groups Home
The XMLField ticket
There are currently too many topics in this group that display first. To make this topic appear first, remove this option from another topic.
There was an error processing your request. Please try again.
flag
  5 messages - Collapse all  -  Translate all to Translated (View all originals)
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
 
From:
To:
Cc:
Followup To:
Add Cc | Add Followup-to | Edit Subject
Subject:
Validation:
For verification purposes please type the characters you see in the picture below or the numbers you hear by clicking the accessibility icon. Listen and type the numbers you hear
 
Paul McMillan  
View profile  
 More options Feb 26 2011, 4:47 am
From: Paul McMillan <p...@mcmillan.ws>
Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2011 01:47:07 -0800
Local: Sat, Feb 26 2011 4:47 am
Subject: The XMLField ticket
Ticket #3094 needs a decision.
http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/3094#comment:17

The quick summary:

Once upon a time the XMLField accepted a schema and validated
documents against that. This hasn't been true since oldforms, yet the
documentation continues to proclaim this. Now, XMLField is basically a
TextField that takes an extra path argument. It's useless, and doesn't
validate anything.

We need to either deprecate it, provide some validation, or fix the
docs to say it doesn't do anything. We can't fix the docs till we have
a decision on this ticket.

Please weight in here or on the ticket. I'll write the patch for
whatever gets chosen.

Thanks,
-Paul


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Alex Gaynor  
View profile  
 More options Feb 26 2011, 4:49 am
From: Alex Gaynor <alex.gay...@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2011 04:49:24 -0500
Local: Sat, Feb 26 2011 4:49 am
Subject: Re: The XMLField ticket

I'd favor having the field do nothing, emit a warning, and eventually be
scrapped.  It's adding nothing ATM and no one is crying.

Alex

--
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to
say it." -- Evelyn Beatrice Hall (summarizing Voltaire)
"The people's good is the highest law." -- Cicero


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Jacob Kaplan-Moss  
View profile  
 More options Feb 26 2011, 2:31 pm
From: Jacob Kaplan-Moss <ja...@jacobian.org>
Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2011 21:31:29 +0200
Local: Sat, Feb 26 2011 2:31 pm
Subject: Re: The XMLField ticket

On Sat, Feb 26, 2011 at 11:47 AM, Paul McMillan <p...@mcmillan.ws> wrote:
> We need to either deprecate it, provide some validation, or fix the
> docs to say it doesn't do anything. We can't fix the docs till we have
> a decision on this ticket.

I say deprecate the field entirely. There isn't a good stdlib way to
validate XML (still!), so let's ditch it in favor of a 3rd party
solution.

Jacob


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Russell Keith-Magee  
View profile  
 More options Feb 26 2011, 7:00 pm
From: Russell Keith-Magee <russ...@keith-magee.com>
Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2011 08:00:53 +0800
Local: Sat, Feb 26 2011 7:00 pm
Subject: Re: The XMLField ticket

On Sun, Feb 27, 2011 at 3:31 AM, Jacob Kaplan-Moss <ja...@jacobian.org> wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 26, 2011 at 11:47 AM, Paul McMillan <p...@mcmillan.ws> wrote:
>> We need to either deprecate it, provide some validation, or fix the
>> docs to say it doesn't do anything. We can't fix the docs till we have
>> a decision on this ticket.

> I say deprecate the field entirely. There isn't a good stdlib way to
> validate XML (still!), so let's ditch it in favor of a 3rd party
> solution.

Agreed. +1.

Russ %-)


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Paul McMillan  
View profile  
 More options Feb 28 2011, 3:15 pm
From: Paul McMillan <P...@McMillan.ws>
Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 12:15:09 -0800 (PST)
Local: Mon, Feb 28 2011 3:15 pm
Subject: Re: The XMLField ticket
I've attached a patch per the discussion here. It's ready for review
and hopefully a speedy commit.

http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/3094#comment:19

-Paul


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
End of messages
« Back to Discussions « Newer topic     Older topic »