Wireshark-bugs: [Wireshark-bugs] [Bug 2226] Mismatching </proto> element in a PDML explort
http://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2226
--- Comment #19 from Rene Baumann <Rene.Baumann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2008-02-07 12:57:48 GMT ---
(In reply to comment #18)
> >
> > I think the not well-formed xml is solved with the newer build versions.
> > There I havent found any problems with that.
>
> That's not what you seemed to be saying earlier. I was expecting you'd post
> your capture file showing a different problem...
The most important thing for me was to get a fix of the not well-formed pdml
files. They are fixed in one of the latest 0.99.8 versions of Wireshark.
It was important for me to make processing by an XML-Parser possible.
the next thing I have been interested in was the Validation of the PDML format
by the posted specification.
My DTD was adapted to your specificaton of PDML, that it works.
> > The only problem I have left is about the validation of this output format.
> > May be you will find a way (or not) of solving this problem.
> > I'm realizing that standards, that are created by somebody, will not be
> > transformed 1:1 in practice... ;-)
> >
>
> I checked in the fake-protocol-wrapper thing in revision 24281. It works for
> the files I've tried (TCP packets and the ARP item I mentioned). I haven't
> tried validating it with the posted DTD file, but it looks OK in my editor and
> in Firefox.
>
I will test it...
> Standards will only be maintained if someone uses and relies upon them. Then
> they will notice when it breaks and report or fix it.
Well... thats the truth... :D
>
> Hope this helps you.
>
Thanks a lot...
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.
