XML definition has syntax errors

Watch Face Studio
1

I have an error when publishing my watchface to google play store that I never had before. I am using WFS version 1.7.13. The error is “Your watch face’s XML definition has syntax errors and cannot be verified by our validator.” I have created many faces before with other versions and have never had this error. I’m not sure what to do about it and is it related to version 1.7.13. Is there some way to fix this?

Thanks

2

This shouldn’t happen! I suspect the tool that Google uses is here. Unfortunately, I don’t think they provide a pre-built release of it, so it’s messy to get going. Its output is also fairly terse and won’t refer directly to anything in your WFS structure since it only looks at the resulting WFF XML. But it might provide a clue.

If you could post your watchface here, I could try to run the validator over it. I’ll do it quicker if you post only the watchface.xml.

3

I am not sure how to use the validation tool so I have attached my watch face file. Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks

John

(Attachment Iris522.wfs is missing)

4

I had to zip the file to so it would send. I am not sure how to use the validation tool so I have attached my watch face file. Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks

John

(attachments)

Iris522.zip (1.92 MB)

5

Here is the validation report, and the watchface.xml code to which it refers (reformatted for human-readability):
Iris.zip (4.7 KB)

I think this means that there needs to be something to display in the ‘Small Box Complication’ text-only case (normal, not AOD). Text seems to be deselected. If you really don’t want to handle the text-only case, try deleting it from the ‘COMPLICATION SETTINGS’ ‘Short text’ area.

The validation tool seems to stop after hitting the first error, so there could be other issues. Consider whether you might have done the same thing elsewhere.

I’m a bit surprised that WFS doesn’t run the validation tool whenever it builds/publishes.

It would, in theory, be possible to develop a web site that would run the validation tool on uploaded WFS/WFF projects.

I hope this helps.

1 Like
6

Gondwana

Thank you for your help with this. I use the complications as selectable app short cuts but hide all text, icons and images so they still function when selected. I have used them like this before and they do work and have been published. I redid them again like a previous watchface and will try again to get it published. I really appreciate the help. I wish Google could provide more details like this so people can find and fix problems easier. I’m not sure what you did to find this but I wish I knew how myself.

Thanks again.

John

7

I should have mentioned that it’s possible that Google is reacting to something else (ie, I’m wrong).

I understand your use of invisible complications. Perhaps you could achieve the same effect by setting the text’s transparency to 0, changing its x so it’s off the screen, or something like that. Those kludges would be less efficient than what you were doing, but not noticeably so.

8

This means that WFS wrongly uses empty Compare element. (WFS bug - should be reported)

To fix this, @blu1604754954 , try not hiding elements from timeline but set opacity their opacity to 0 instead.

As @Gondwana wrote, there may be other issues with the watchface.xml because you probably do the same thing referenced here on multiple places

Solutions.

  1. For hidden app shortcuts you should probably only use SMALL_IMAGE & MONOCHROMATIC_IMAGE complication slot types.
  2. leave elements visible on timeline but set their opacity to 0

Tomas

1 Like
9

I believe you are correct about this. I have made these changes and reposted my watchface and have not been rejected yet. Hopefully it will be publiched soon and I will follow up stating that. I’m not sure how to report this but I agree it should seeing we don’t have control of the XML files. I want to thank you for your comments and help to get this resolved. Google does a poor job and describing problems and letting people know what they are.

Thanks

10

I think you can report WFS issues here.

I agree that Google could do better when reporting such bugs, since the issue would have been staring them in the face (they see the validation.txt that I posted above). Admittedly it might not mean a lot to many developers.

Of course, it would be better if WFS were incapable of producing code that failed the XML validation test, or at least warned you when it was doing so.

11

I’ve successfully published my watchface. The issue stemmed from WFS and the XML file validation. Although the watchface functioned correctly, pinpointing the exact problem was challenging. It appears to have been related to using a fixed small box complication and the visibility of the unused portions of the complication. The solution was to ensure all unused parts were within the slot boundary and set their visibility to zero. I hope this insight assists others facing similar issues. My gratitude goes to Gondwana and amoledwatchfaces for their assistance in identifying the problem.

1 Like