On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 7:57 AM, Gábor Márton <martongabesz@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Michael,

We are reading system wise configuration settings with the use of a
special API, and then we are populating these values to the ptree.
There are nodes in the system which has the signature described with
this regex 'CudbAppServiceId=\d+'. Ptree itself handles this
perfectly, so we gained a higher level abstraction via the proerty
tree. The only problem is there, when we want to export the
configuration to XML.

Yessir, I see. Well, I've worked with Xml for a number of years and I don't think I've ever seen a case like that. Given your use case, it would be more typical to do something like this: <CudbAppServiceId value="\d+" /> (excuse the mixed Xml / regex); or <CudbAppServiceId value="\d+">...</CudbAppServiceId> (parent element, with whatever children). Or could even do something like this: <CudbAppServiceId>1</CudbAppServiceId>, but it sounds like there are children elements involved, so likely not.

That's my two cents anyway.

Good hunting!
 
Of course one solution would be to go through the ptree instance, and
search for the regex mentioned before and replace the equality sign in
every node. I consider this as a too high level solution, I think this
should rather be handled in the write_xml function.

BR,
Gabor

On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 12:34 PM, Michael Powell <mwpowellhtx@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 3:30 AM, Gábor Márton <martongabesz@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> 'CudbAppServiceId=1' is not an attribute, this should be the tag
>> itself. In fact, the XML would be correct if the tag would not contain
>> the special equality sign.
>
>
> Kind of my point: I might challenge whether CubdAppServiceId1 wasn't
> intended to be the tag. The '=' just confuses things, except possibly as an
> artifact of the INFO specification, which I am ignorant of.
>
>>
>> 'CudbAppServiceId=1' is a node in the property tree, which don't have
>> value, but has 3 children.
>> So a well formed XML would look like this, I suppose:
>> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
>> <CudbAppServiceId&#61;1>
>> <userLabel/>
>> <sqlAppSrvPlSchema>identities-pl.sql</sqlAppSrvPlSchema>
>> <CudbAppServiceId>CudbAppServiceId&#61;1</CudbAppServiceId>
>> </CudbAppServiceId&#61;1>
>>
>> The bug is reported here:
>> https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/8095
>>
>> BR,
>> Gabor
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 4:38 PM, Michael Powell <mwpowellhtx@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Will assume that he's filed a bug. Not sure what the intended goal is
>> > since
>> > I'm not familiar with INFO per se. Are we saying that CdbAppServiceId=1
>> > is
>> > an attribute?
>> >
>> > Or is intended as a tab with "1" value? What sort of general bug is
>> > this?
>> > Does it impact pure Xml usage with Xml paths, parents, children,
>> > elements,
>> > attributes, values, etc?
>> >
>> > Thank you...
>> >
>> >
>> > On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 7:37 AM, Sebastian Redl
>> > <sebastian.redl@getdesigned.at> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On 02/18/2013 02:10 PM, Gábor Márton wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> Hi,
>> >>>
>> >>> I have the following property tree, dumped in INFO format:
>> >>>
>> >>> CudbAppServiceId=1
>> >>> {
>> >>>      userLabel ""
>> >>>      sqlAppSrvPlSchema identities-pl.sql
>> >>>      CudbAppServiceId CudbAppServiceId=1
>> >>> }
>> >>>
>> >>> When I dump it in XML format, I got the following:
>> >>>
>> >>> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
>> >>> <CudbAppServiceId=1>
>> >>> <userLabel/>
>> >>> <sqlAppSrvPlSchema>identities-pl.sql</sqlAppSrvPlSchema>
>> >>> <CudbAppServiceId>CudbAppServiceId=1</CudbAppServiceId>
>> >>> </CudbAppServiceId=1>
>> >>>
>> >>> This is not a valid XML, because we have a tag "CudbAppServiceId=1".
>> >>> Of course, any other xml parser like xmllint will fail to parse it,
>> >>> because of the equality sign in the tag.
>> >>>
>> >>> Is there any solution to this problem? Like somehow emitting &#61;
>> >>> instead of the raw '=' inside the tag and in the text?
>> >>>
>> >> Please file a bug. It might still be a few weeks before I get to work
>> >> on
>> >> PropertyTree properly again, and this mail will get lost otherwise.
>> >>
>> >> Sebastian
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> Boost-users mailing list
>> >> Boost-users@lists.boost.org
>> >> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Boost-users mailing list
>> > Boost-users@lists.boost.org
>> > http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users
>> _______________________________________________
>> Boost-users mailing list
>> Boost-users@lists.boost.org
>> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Boost-users mailing list
> Boost-users@lists.boost.org
> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users
_______________________________________________
Boost-users mailing list
Boost-users@lists.boost.org
http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users