After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 316770 - OMF validation errors in gfloppy-ja.omf
OMF validation errors in gfloppy-ja.omf
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Product: l10n
Classification: Infrastructure
Component: Japanese [ja]
GNOME 2.12
Other Linux
: Normal normal
: ---
Assigned To: Takeshi AIHANA
Takeshi AIHANA
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2005-09-20 09:28 UTC by Sebastien Bacher
Modified: 2007-08-13 12:56 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---


Attachments
fixes the issue (676 bytes, patch)
2005-09-20 09:29 UTC, Sebastien Bacher
none Details | Review

Description Sebastien Bacher 2005-09-20 09:28:23 UTC
This bug has been opened here: http://bugzilla.ubuntu.com/show_bug.cgi?id=15844

"The command "scrollkeeper-rebuilddb -v" reports (among other things):

OMF validation error: Element resource content does not follow the DTD,
expecting (creator+ , maintainer* , contributor* , title , date , version* ,
subject* , description? , type* , coverage* , format , identifier , language ,
relation* , source* , rights*), got (creator title contributor date subject
format identifier language relation )

OMF file [/usr/share/omf/gnome-utils/gfloppy-ja.omf] does not validate against
ScrollKeeper-OMF DTD: /usr/share/xml/scrollkeeper/dtds/scrollkeeper-omf.dtd

Unable to register /usr/share/omf/gnome-utils/gfloppy-ja.om

---

I do not use japaneese environment so I do not know what is the effect of that."
Comment 1 Sebastien Bacher 2005-09-20 09:29:27 UTC
Created attachment 52427 [details] [review]
fixes the issue
Comment 2 Takeshi AIHANA 2005-10-04 13:23:46 UTC
Well, I could not reproduce this yet on my linux box.
I've already updated to the GNOME-2.12 series, 
then I just run scrollkeeper you've done like:

$ gfloppy --version
Gnome gfloppy 2.12.0
$ scrollkeeper-config --version
0.3.14
$ env LANG=C  LC_ALL=C scrollkeeper-rebuilddb -v > & /tmp/gfloppy-omf_bug.log
$ grep "OMF validation error" /tmp/gfloppy-omf_bug.log
$ grep gfloppy-ja /tmp/gfloppy-omf_bug.log
scrollkeeper-update: warning: /usr/share/omf/gnome-utils/gfloppy-ja.omf
overrides /usr/local/share/omf/gnome-utils/gfloppy-ja.omf
Registering /usr/share/omf/gnome-utils/gfloppy-ja.omf

So, How can I find your problem?
Comment 3 Takeshi AIHANA 2005-10-04 13:26:46 UTC
PS: I have plain build all of GNOME 2.12, I don't use any distributions.
Comment 4 Sebastien Bacher 2005-10-04 14:25:01 UTC
$ LANG=C scrollkeeper-install -v /var/lib/scrollkeeper/
/usr/share/omf/gnome-utils/gfloppy-ja.omf
Registering /usr/share/omf/gnome-utils/gfloppy-ja.omf
OMF validation error: Element resource content does not follow the DTD,
expecting (creator+ , maintainer* , contributor* , title , date , version* ,
subject* , description? , type* , coverage* , format , identifier , language ,
relation* , source* , rights*), got (creator title contributor date subject
format identifier language relation )
OMF file [/usr/share/omf/gnome-utils/gfloppy-ja.omf] does not validate against
ScrollKeeper-OMF DTD: /usr/share/xml/scrollkeeper/dtds/scrollkeeper-omf.dtd
Comment 5 Takeshi AIHANA 2005-10-08 12:38:42 UTC
OK, Thanks.
I found this warning when I just run your command-line on both
ubuntu(5.04)/debian(Sarge) distributions.
And I also did same installing on Fedora and my plain build machine.
It seems that this warnig would be out if omf file has invalid tags which DTD
does not permit as elements.In this case, that is <contributor></contributor> pair.
I will remove this tag pair from gfloppy-ja.omf, and try to valid to install it
again with new scrollkeeper which has patched with
"debian/patches/06_clean_xml_validation_context.diff".
Then, if OK, I'll commit it to the both HEAD/gnome-2.12 branch ASAP.
Incidentally, Fedora has avoided meaningly this waring by patching to the same
code.
Comment 6 Takeshi AIHANA 2005-10-08 13:16:04 UTC
Ahh, I have mistaken the above casus.
It's just encoding issue with UTF-8 (ie: by numeric character reference).
I fixed and try to valid it.
Comment 7 Takeshi AIHANA 2006-03-05 02:20:51 UTC
Done. A new omf file has been in HEAD branch.