Look at these lines:
var doc = jsdom.jsdom("<moshe></moshe>");
console.log(doc.childNodes[0].tagName);
The second line writes "MOSHE" to the console in uppercase that means jsdom recognized my string as HTML and not XML. How can I enforce jsdom to preserve tag name original case?
Thanks in advance.
According to the HTML standard tagName is supposed to be uppercase in a HTML document.
The tagName attribute must run these steps:
If context object's namespace prefix is not null, let qualified name be its namespace prefix, followed by a ":" (U+003A), followed by its local name. Otherwise, let qualified name be its local name.
If the context object is in the HTML namespace and its node document
is an HTML document, let qualified name be converted to ASCII
uppercase.
Return qualified name.
Jsdom currently does not support XML documents (officially), since there's no differentiation internally between a HTML and XML document.
To parse as XML in v1.0+ you have to provide htmlparser2 as the parser, jsdom then implies parsing as XML based on a <?xml directive. This might become unnecessary if #883 gets merged, in which case a parsingMode option will be introduced, which accepts "xml" and switches to a xml parser.
Ultimately, work is underway to go about this problem, however an immediate solution to parsing XML with jsdom is not in sight.
Related
Currently, I'm working on a feature that involves parsing XML that we receive from another product. I decided to run some tests against some actual customer data, and it looks like the other product is allowing input from users that should be considered invalid. Anyways, I still have to try and figure out a way to parse it. We're using javax.xml.parsers.DocumentBuilder and I'm getting an error on input that looks like the following.
<xml>
...
<description>Example:Description:<THIS-IS-PART-OF-DESCRIPTION></description>
...
</xml>
As you can tell, the description has what appears to be an invalid tag inside of it (<THIS-IS-PART-OF-DESCRIPTION>). Now, this description tag is known to be a leaf tag and shouldn't have any nested tags inside of it. Regardless, this is still an issue and yields an exception on DocumentBuilder.parse(...)
I know this is invalid XML, but it's predictably invalid. Any ideas on a way to parse such input?
That "XML" is worse than invalid – it's not well-formed; see Well Formed vs Valid XML.
An informal assessment of the predictability of the transgressions does not help. That textual data is not XML. No conformant XML tools or libraries can help you process it.
Options, most desirable first:
Have the provider fix the problem on their end. Demand well-formed XML. (Technically the phrase well-formed XML is redundant but may be useful for emphasis.)
Use a tolerant markup parser to cleanup the problem ahead of parsing as XML:
Standalone: xmlstarlet has robust recovering and repair capabilities credit: RomanPerekhrest
xmlstarlet fo -o -R -H -D bad.xml 2>/dev/null
Standalone and C/C++: HTML Tidy works with XML too. Taggle is a port of TagSoup to C++.
Python: Beautiful Soup is Python-based. See notes in the Differences between parsers section. See also answers to this question for more
suggestions for dealing with not-well-formed markup in Python,
including especially lxml's recover=True option.
See also this answer for how to use codecs.EncodedFile() to cleanup illegal characters.
Java: TagSoup and JSoup focus on HTML. FilterInputStream can be used for preprocessing cleanup.
.NET:
XmlReaderSettings.CheckCharacters can
be disabled to get past illegal XML character problems.
#jdweng notes that XmlReaderSettings.ConformanceLevel can be set to
ConformanceLevel.Fragment so that XmlReader can read XML Well-Formed Parsed Entities lacking a root element.
#jdweng also reports that XmlReader.ReadToFollowing() can sometimes
be used to work-around XML syntactical issues, but note
rule-breaking warning in #3 below.
Microsoft.Language.Xml.XMLParser is said to be “error-tolerant”.
Go: Set Decoder.Strict to false as shown in this example by #chuckx.
PHP: See DOMDocument::$recover and libxml_use_internal_errors(true). See nice example here.
Ruby: Nokogiri supports “Gentle Well-Formedness”.
R: See htmlTreeParse() for fault-tolerant markup parsing in R.
Perl: See XML::Liberal, a "super liberal XML parser that parses broken XML."
Process the data as text manually using a text editor or
programmatically using character/string functions. Doing this
programmatically can range from tricky to impossible as
what appears to be
predictable often is not -- rule breaking is rarely bound by rules.
For invalid character errors, use regex to remove/replace invalid characters:
PHP: preg_replace('/[^\x{0009}\x{000a}\x{000d}\x{0020}-\x{D7FF}\x{E000}-\x{FFFD}]+/u', ' ', $s);
Ruby: string.tr("^\u{0009}\u{000a}\u{000d}\u{0020}-\u{D7FF}\u{E000}-\u{FFFD}", ' ')
JavaScript: inputStr.replace(/[^\x09\x0A\x0D\x20-\xFF\x85\xA0-\uD7FF\uE000-\uFDCF\uFDE0-\uFFFD]/gm, '')
For ampersands, use regex to replace matches with &: credit: blhsin, demo
&(?!(?:#\d+|#x[0-9a-f]+|\w+);)
Note that the above regular expressions won't take comments or CDATA
sections into account.
A standard XML parser will NEVER accept invalid XML, by design.
Your only option is to pre-process the input to remove the "predictably invalid" content, or wrap it in CDATA, prior to parsing it.
The accepted answer is good advice, and contains very useful links.
I'd like to add that this, and many other cases of not-wellformed and/or DTD-invalid XML can be repaired using SGML, the ISO-standardized superset of HTML and XML. In your case, what works is to declare the bogus THIS-IS-PART-OF-DESCRIPTION element as SGML empty element and then use eg. the osx program (part of the OpenSP/OpenJade SGML package) to convert it to XML. For example, if you supply the following to osx
<!DOCTYPE xml [
<!ELEMENT xml - - ANY>
<!ELEMENT description - - ANY>
<!ELEMENT THIS-IS-PART-OF-DESCRIPTION - - EMPTY>
]>
<xml>
<description>blah blah
<THIS-IS-PART-OF-DESCRIPTION>
</description>
</xml>
it will output well-formed XML for further processing with the XML tools of your choice.
Note, however, that your example snippet has another problem in that element names starting with the letters xml or XML or Xml etc. are reserved in XML, and won't be accepted by conforming XML parsers.
IMO these cases should be solved by using JSoup.
Below is a not-really answer for this specific case, but found this on the web (thanks to inuyasha82 on Coderwall). This code bit did inspire me for another similar problem while dealing with malformed XMLs, so I share it here.
Please do not edit what is below, as it is as it on the original website.
The XML format, requires to be valid a unique root element declared in the document.
So for example a valid xml is:
<root>
<element>...</element>
<element>...</element>
</root>
But if you have a document like:
<element>...</element>
<element>...</element>
<element>...</element>
<element>...</element>
This will be considered a malformed XML, so many xml parsers just throw an Exception complaining about no root element. Etc.
In this example there is a solution on how to solve that problem and succesfully parse the malformed xml above.
Basically what we will do is to add programmatically a root element.
So first of all you have to open the resource that contains your "malformed" xml (i. e. a file):
File file = new File(pathtofile);
Then open a FileInputStream:
FileInputStream fis = new FileInputStream(file);
If we try to parse this stream with any XML library at that point we will raise the malformed document Exception.
Now we create a list of InputStream objects with three lements:
A ByteIputStream element that contains the string: <root>
Our FileInputStream
A ByteInputStream with the string: </root>
So the code is:
List<InputStream> streams =
Arrays.asList(
new ByteArrayInputStream("<root>".getBytes()),
fis,
new ByteArrayInputStream("</root>".getBytes()));
Now using a SequenceInputStream, we create a container for the List created above:
InputStream cntr =
new SequenceInputStream(Collections.enumeration(str));
Now we can use any XML Parser library, on the cntr, and it will be parsed without any problem. (Checked with Stax library);
The Qt documentation advertises the following syntax to add meta-data to translated strings.
An alternative way to attach meta-data is to use the following syntax:
//~ <field name> <field contents>
This can be used to attach meta-data to the message. The field name should consist of a domain prefix (possibly the conventional file extension of the file format the field is inspired by), a hyphen and the actual field name in underscore-delimited notation. For storage in TS files, the field name together with the prefix "extra-" will form an XML element name. The field contents will be XML-escaped, but otherwise appear verbatim as the element's contents. Any number of unique fields can be added to each message.
Example:
//: This is a comment for the translator.
//= qtn_foo_bar
//~ loc-layout_id foo_dialog
//~ loc-blank False
//~ magic-stuff This might mean something magic.
QString text = MyMagicClass::tr("Sim sala bim.");
Even when I copy the special comments verbatim into the source code, the <extracomment> appears in the .ts file, and the id is added as <message id="qtn_foo_bar">.
As for the meta-data, I would expect new entries in the .ts file, e. g. <extra-loc-layout_id>foo_dialog</extra-loc-layout_id>, but the meta-data doesn't appear at all.
How do I make this work?
Currently, I'm working on a feature that involves parsing XML that we receive from another product. I decided to run some tests against some actual customer data, and it looks like the other product is allowing input from users that should be considered invalid. Anyways, I still have to try and figure out a way to parse it. We're using javax.xml.parsers.DocumentBuilder and I'm getting an error on input that looks like the following.
<xml>
...
<description>Example:Description:<THIS-IS-PART-OF-DESCRIPTION></description>
...
</xml>
As you can tell, the description has what appears to be an invalid tag inside of it (<THIS-IS-PART-OF-DESCRIPTION>). Now, this description tag is known to be a leaf tag and shouldn't have any nested tags inside of it. Regardless, this is still an issue and yields an exception on DocumentBuilder.parse(...)
I know this is invalid XML, but it's predictably invalid. Any ideas on a way to parse such input?
That "XML" is worse than invalid – it's not well-formed; see Well Formed vs Valid XML.
An informal assessment of the predictability of the transgressions does not help. That textual data is not XML. No conformant XML tools or libraries can help you process it.
Options, most desirable first:
Have the provider fix the problem on their end. Demand well-formed XML. (Technically the phrase well-formed XML is redundant but may be useful for emphasis.)
Use a tolerant markup parser to cleanup the problem ahead of parsing as XML:
Standalone: xmlstarlet has robust recovering and repair capabilities credit: RomanPerekhrest
xmlstarlet fo -o -R -H -D bad.xml 2>/dev/null
Standalone and C/C++: HTML Tidy works with XML too. Taggle is a port of TagSoup to C++.
Python: Beautiful Soup is Python-based. See notes in the Differences between parsers section. See also answers to this question for more
suggestions for dealing with not-well-formed markup in Python,
including especially lxml's recover=True option.
See also this answer for how to use codecs.EncodedFile() to cleanup illegal characters.
Java: TagSoup and JSoup focus on HTML. FilterInputStream can be used for preprocessing cleanup.
.NET:
XmlReaderSettings.CheckCharacters can
be disabled to get past illegal XML character problems.
#jdweng notes that XmlReaderSettings.ConformanceLevel can be set to
ConformanceLevel.Fragment so that XmlReader can read XML Well-Formed Parsed Entities lacking a root element.
#jdweng also reports that XmlReader.ReadToFollowing() can sometimes
be used to work-around XML syntactical issues, but note
rule-breaking warning in #3 below.
Microsoft.Language.Xml.XMLParser is said to be “error-tolerant”.
Go: Set Decoder.Strict to false as shown in this example by #chuckx.
PHP: See DOMDocument::$recover and libxml_use_internal_errors(true). See nice example here.
Ruby: Nokogiri supports “Gentle Well-Formedness”.
R: See htmlTreeParse() for fault-tolerant markup parsing in R.
Perl: See XML::Liberal, a "super liberal XML parser that parses broken XML."
Process the data as text manually using a text editor or
programmatically using character/string functions. Doing this
programmatically can range from tricky to impossible as
what appears to be
predictable often is not -- rule breaking is rarely bound by rules.
For invalid character errors, use regex to remove/replace invalid characters:
PHP: preg_replace('/[^\x{0009}\x{000a}\x{000d}\x{0020}-\x{D7FF}\x{E000}-\x{FFFD}]+/u', ' ', $s);
Ruby: string.tr("^\u{0009}\u{000a}\u{000d}\u{0020}-\u{D7FF}\u{E000}-\u{FFFD}", ' ')
JavaScript: inputStr.replace(/[^\x09\x0A\x0D\x20-\xFF\x85\xA0-\uD7FF\uE000-\uFDCF\uFDE0-\uFFFD]/gm, '')
For ampersands, use regex to replace matches with &: credit: blhsin, demo
&(?!(?:#\d+|#x[0-9a-f]+|\w+);)
Note that the above regular expressions won't take comments or CDATA
sections into account.
A standard XML parser will NEVER accept invalid XML, by design.
Your only option is to pre-process the input to remove the "predictably invalid" content, or wrap it in CDATA, prior to parsing it.
The accepted answer is good advice, and contains very useful links.
I'd like to add that this, and many other cases of not-wellformed and/or DTD-invalid XML can be repaired using SGML, the ISO-standardized superset of HTML and XML. In your case, what works is to declare the bogus THIS-IS-PART-OF-DESCRIPTION element as SGML empty element and then use eg. the osx program (part of the OpenSP/OpenJade SGML package) to convert it to XML. For example, if you supply the following to osx
<!DOCTYPE xml [
<!ELEMENT xml - - ANY>
<!ELEMENT description - - ANY>
<!ELEMENT THIS-IS-PART-OF-DESCRIPTION - - EMPTY>
]>
<xml>
<description>blah blah
<THIS-IS-PART-OF-DESCRIPTION>
</description>
</xml>
it will output well-formed XML for further processing with the XML tools of your choice.
Note, however, that your example snippet has another problem in that element names starting with the letters xml or XML or Xml etc. are reserved in XML, and won't be accepted by conforming XML parsers.
IMO these cases should be solved by using JSoup.
Below is a not-really answer for this specific case, but found this on the web (thanks to inuyasha82 on Coderwall). This code bit did inspire me for another similar problem while dealing with malformed XMLs, so I share it here.
Please do not edit what is below, as it is as it on the original website.
The XML format, requires to be valid a unique root element declared in the document.
So for example a valid xml is:
<root>
<element>...</element>
<element>...</element>
</root>
But if you have a document like:
<element>...</element>
<element>...</element>
<element>...</element>
<element>...</element>
This will be considered a malformed XML, so many xml parsers just throw an Exception complaining about no root element. Etc.
In this example there is a solution on how to solve that problem and succesfully parse the malformed xml above.
Basically what we will do is to add programmatically a root element.
So first of all you have to open the resource that contains your "malformed" xml (i. e. a file):
File file = new File(pathtofile);
Then open a FileInputStream:
FileInputStream fis = new FileInputStream(file);
If we try to parse this stream with any XML library at that point we will raise the malformed document Exception.
Now we create a list of InputStream objects with three lements:
A ByteIputStream element that contains the string: <root>
Our FileInputStream
A ByteInputStream with the string: </root>
So the code is:
List<InputStream> streams =
Arrays.asList(
new ByteArrayInputStream("<root>".getBytes()),
fis,
new ByteArrayInputStream("</root>".getBytes()));
Now using a SequenceInputStream, we create a container for the List created above:
InputStream cntr =
new SequenceInputStream(Collections.enumeration(str));
Now we can use any XML Parser library, on the cntr, and it will be parsed without any problem. (Checked with Stax library);
I'm breaking my head over this for a while now and I have no clue what I do wrong.
The scenario is as followed, I'm using swfupload to upload files with a progressbar
via a webservice. the webservice needs to return the name of the generated thumbnail.
This all goes well and though i prefer to get the returned data in json (might change it later in the swfupload js files) the default xml data is fine too.
So when an upload completes the webservice returns the following xml as expected (note I removed the namespace in webservice):
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<string>myfile.jpg</string>
Now I want to parse this result with jquery and thought the following would do it:
var xml = response;
alert($(xml).find("string").text());
But I cannot get the string value. I've tried lots of combinations (.html(), .innerhtml(), response.find("string").text() but nothing seems to work. This is my first time trying to parse xml via jquery so maybe I'm doing something fundemantally wrong. The 'response' is populated with the xml.
I hope someone can help me with this.
Thanks for your time.
Kind regards,
Mark
I think $(xml) is looking for a dom object with a selector that matches the string value of XML, so I guess it's coming back null or empty?
The First Plugin mentioned below xmldom looks pretty good, but if your returned XML really is as simply as your example above, a bit of string parsing might be quicker, something like:
var start = xml.indexOf('<string>') + 8;
var end = xml.indexOf('</string>');
var resultstring = xml.substring(start, end);
From this answer to this question: How to query an XML string via DOM in jQuery
Quote:
There are a 2 ways to approach this.
Convert the XML string to DOM, parse it using this plugin or follow this tutorial
Convert the XML to JSON using this plugin.
jQuery cannot parse XML. If you pass a string full of XML content into the $ function it will typically try to parse it as HTML instead using standard innerHTML. If you really need to parse a string full of XML you will need browser-specific and not-globally-supported methods like new DOMParser and the XMLDOM ActiveXObject, or a plugin that wraps them.
But you almost never need to do this, since an XMLHttpRequest should return a fully-parsed XML DOM in the responseXML property. If your web service is correctly setting a Content-Type response header to tell the browser that what's coming back is XML, then the data argument to your callback function should be an XML Document object and not a string. In that case you should be able to use your example with find() and text() without problems.
If the server-side does not return an XML Content-Type header and you're unable to fix that, you can pass the option type: 'xml' in the ajax settings as an override.
I have an xml file and an xslt file.
The xml file has a xmlns="exa:com.test" attribute.
If i remove this attribute in the xml the xpath sentences in my xslt works. But if i leave it, doesnt work.
Im using the following code to mix xml and xslt:
XslCompiledTransform transformer = new XslCompiledTransform();
transformer.Load(HttpContext.Current.Server.MapPath("xslt\\searchresults.xslt"));
transformer.Transform(xmlreader, null, utf8stringwriter);
What im doing wrong? How could i mix xml and xslt if the xml has the xmlns attribute on top?
The xmlns attribute without prefix name replaces the default namespace, so that your query matches nodes with a different (empty) namespace. You need to use a prefixed namespace in the XSLT XPath queries (or a XmlNamespaceManager for isolated XPath queries) and your queries will work again as expected.
In the XSLT:
<xsl:stylesheet ... xmlns:exa="exa:com.test">
Then, assuming that you used to match for instance xyz, you now change your query like this:
<xsl:template match="exa:xyz"> ...
In general you might want to read some docs on XML namespaces.
It should be noted though, though the namespace string is to just be seen as an exact literal string that is used as an identifier with no other meaning. The string must conform to an IANA uri, this is to guarantee uniqueness of namespaces. Some parsers refuse to parse namespaces that do not conform.
Also note that because they are strings http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml and for instance http://w3.org/1999/xhtml/ are for the purposes of namespaces completely different namespaces.
You might want to read up on how namespaces in XML work. exa:com.test is as far as I know not a valid namespace string.