EricF <> wrote:
> In article <>, wrote:
>> Some project developed in Eclipse needs certain "*.xml"-files
>> for running/testing. Some of these files are (and really have
>> to be) invalid XML and eclipse flags them red.
> I see that you figured out how to get past this but it has a bad smell to it.
I do agree on the bad smell, but natural fertilizer typically has it, too...
> If the files are bad xml and have to be bad xml, then they should not be xml.
The tool, to which these files are fed, woudn't accept anything but files
with an .xml extension. That means, we would have to rename the files to
..xml during production. Specifically silencing eclipse for them really looks
like the easier (less intrusive) solution. What I didn't write so far is,
that the maintenance of the valid and the invalid xmls is some coworker's job
and he probably appreciates seeing the red flags where he actively expects
to see them. It's an indication to them that the right part is wrong
> Or the bad part should be cdata.
Making the bad part cdata, however, misses the point, as the files would be
correct xml, then.
Thanks, anyway, for caring that far. I don't ask anyone to waste more
thoughts into this thread. There are too many unanswered questions (two
old ones by myself, one about sharing code between a library-project and
a plugin-project in eclipse <>,
and one about Corba and ssliop <>)
whose answering would be so much more appreciated...