Clarity

 View Only
  • 1.  Issue with Xogging a process via SOAP request in Gel Scriptin

    Posted May 03, 2019 09:10 AM

    I am facing an issue while xogging a gel script via process(Soap) where comments are getting erased after the successful xog.Prashank.Singh

     

    <core:catch var="err_xog">
    <soap:invoke endpoint="${xogURL}" var="xogResponse">
    <soap:message>
    <soapenv:Envelope>
    <soapenv:Header>
    <Auth>
    <core:choose>
    <core:when test="${empty(xogSessionId)}">
    <Username>${xog_username}</Username>
    <Password>${xog_password}</Password>
    </core:when>
    <core:otherwise>
    <SessionID>${xogSessionId}</SessionID>
    </core:otherwise>
    </core:choose>
    </Auth>
    </soapenv:Header>
    <soapenv:Body>
    <gel:parse var="xogRequest" file="${rowitem.source_file_path}"/>
    <gel:set escapeText="false" asString="true" select="$xogRequest" var="output"/>
    <gel:log level="INFO" message="gellog issue:
    ${output}"/>

    <gel:serialize fileName="/app/localstorage/SupratikCheckAuto/supratikwrong.xml" var="${xogRequest}" />
    <gel:include select="$xogRequest" />

     

    </soapenv:Body>
    </soapenv:Envelope>
    </soap:message>
    </soap:invoke>
    </core:catch>

     

    The XOG is successful but the comments which are present in xogRequest(means the gelscript file invoked) gets removed.

     

    Need an urgent help@@



  • 2.  Re: Issue with Xogging a process via SOAP request in Gel Scriptin

    Posted May 03, 2019 10:30 AM

    Not sure I really understand what you are "xogging", but I have seen comments disappear from XML/GEL scripts when put in a process-step in the application. The comments were removed if they were outside of the gel script, i.e. if the text started with the comments and then had the <gel:script>. Simple fix (in my case) was to ensure comments were in the body of the script. 

    (just GUESSing here)



  • 3.  Re: Issue with Xogging a process via SOAP request in Gel Scriptin
    Best Answer

    Posted May 03, 2019 12:46 PM

    The issue if fixed by putting the comment in CDATA block