Hi David, David M Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 04/19/2007 02:52:14 AM: > On > http://xml.apache.org/commons/ > > I read: > > Issues Jan-02: our current SAX and JAXP code may not pass the > current J2EE CTS test suite, since we have bugfixes > above what those CTS tests mandate. If you don't know what that is, > you don't care; otherwise ask on commons-dev for > an update. > > So ... I'm asking for an update! :) > > First, does that Jan-02 mean the second day of January this year, > or, the Month of January in the year 2002 ... in which case, > I'd assume the comment is completely out of date?
The Jan-02 there means January 2002. The front page is horribly out of date. > My _real_ reason for asking, is I would like to confirm or > disconfirm that the code in xml-apis.jar is the exact same code thatwould be > available from it's original sources, It is not. The Apache version contains many bug fixes and improvements. > From a quick analysis, for example, when I look at the SAX code from > xml-commons-external-1.3.04-src > and compare it to the SAX code from > 2.0.2 (sax2r3) > There is two extra files in the apache version: > SecuritySupport.java, and > SecuritySupport12.java. > > So ... I'm wondering, does this sound right? Hava I made a mistake > and they really are supposed to be the same? That's right. The SecuritySupport classes are only in the Apache version. > Would there be similar small differences in the org.w3c.dom packages > and javax.xml packages? Yes. > Is there any where these differences are explained or documtned? Many of the differences are documented in the change log here [1]. > And ... the _real_ reason I want to know all this, is I am working > on creating OSGi bundles for use with Eclipse. > And, my end-goal is (mostly) to use the xerces implementation. In > which case, I assume I would _have_ to use the > sax APIs from Apache not their original source. And, if I do that, > any advice on how I should represent the _version_ of those > sax APIs? Version 2.0.2.1304xxxxxx (just to sort of reflect it came > from xml-commons version 1.3.04? 1.3.04 represents the version of xml-commons-external as a whole. 2.0.2.1304 might confuse folks; not sure how you can represent that in a self describing way. > Any advice welcome. [1] http://xml.apache.org/commons/changes.html#version_xml-commons-external-1.3.04 Michael Glavassevich XML Parser Development IBM Toronto Lab E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
