The single "No grammar constraints (DTD or XML Schema) referenced in
the document" warning arises in a generated file. I doubt that we can
change the generation process to include grammar information. Even if
we could, I don't mind omitting validation here assuming that we can
trust the generator tool to be correct. Validation is much more
important for human-authored XML; for tool-authored XML, we can live
without it.
When Maven generates these "*/target/antrun/build-main.xml" Any build
scripts, it does not include any DTD or XML Schema declarations.
Eclipse's XML validator warns about the lack of grammar constraints.
The warning is sensible, but we are not in a position to do anything
about it. Better, therefore, to suppress these warnings so that we
can more-clearly see warnings we *can* address.
I think the "target/p2artifacts.xml" and "target/p2content.xml" files
are generated by Maven. They are well-formed XML but Eclipse's XML
validator legitimately warns that they lack grammar constraints.
Since we're not maintaining the tool that creates these files, we are
not in a position to do anything about that. Therefore, we may as
well exclude these from validation entirely. That way we can
more-clearly recognize warnings that we *can* do something about.
It's unclear whether the original authors of these pages intended them
to be valid or invalid. Certainly there is merit in testing against
invalid HTML, since the vast majority of real-world HTML is indeed
invalid. I'm going to assume that any errors in this collection of
test inputs are intentional, and therefore not worth reporting when
running Eclipse HTML validation.
Eclipse validation warns about invalid HTML content in all
Maven-generated "target/site/dependency-convergence.html" files. The
warnings are legitimate: these HTML files are indeed invalid.
However, we don't maintain the tool that generates these files, so we
are not in a position to fix them. Better, therefore, to suppress
these warnings so that we can notice and fix other problems over which
we do have control.
Other subdirectories' "build.properties" generally seem to include this
already, so who am I to argue?
This resolves one "An entry for META-INF/ is required in bin.includes"
Eclipse warning.
Also update the project configuration to treat this warning as an
error. This should discourage commits that create new instances of
this sort of problem in the future.
Ben Liblit
Julian Dolby
Manu Sridharan
Manu Sridharan
dolby