: Saturday, July 22, 2006 11:44 AM
To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [classlib][html] HTML 3.2 or 4.01
I agree that we should implement both if it possible. Since we can
easile determine the HTML version by DTD in the header.
SY, Alexey
2006/7/22, Miguel Montes [EMAIL PROTECTED
Yes, AFAIK, SUN still does not support DTD 4.01 in JAVA 6.Refer to [1]
May be they will wait for JAVA 7. And many
developers are calling for DTD 4.01 support. IMO, it's a good idea to
support DTD 4.01 in our project.
Best regards
[1]http://download.java.net/jdk6/docs/api/
2006/7/22, Mikhail
BTW there are a lot of other RFEs:
http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/top25_rfes.do Sun is asked to implement.
Some of them are very interesting and could be implemented in Harmony as JDK
extentions: struct/hotcode replacement/ftp support/logging support with
ability to remove it from code like
Mikhail Fursov 写道:
BTW there are a lot of other RFEs:
http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/top25_rfes.do Sun is asked to implement.
Some of them are very interesting and could be implemented in Harmony
as JDK
extentions: struct/hotcode replacement/ftp support/logging support with
ability to remove
Can we get Java 5 done first? ;)
geir
Mikhail Fursov wrote:
BTW there are a lot of other RFEs:
http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/top25_rfes.do Sun is asked to implement.
Some of them are very interesting and could be implemented in Harmony as
JDK
extentions: struct/hotcode replacement/ftp
Geir Magnusson Jr 写道:
Can we get Java 5 done first? ;)
geir
Yes, of course. :-)
Mikhail Fursov wrote:
BTW there are a lot of other RFEs:
http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/top25_rfes.do Sun is asked to implement.
Some of them are very interesting and could be implemented in Harmony as
I agree that we should implement both if it possible. Since we can
easile determine the HTML version by DTD in the header.
SY, Alexey
2006/7/22, Miguel Montes [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
HI all:
Intel has just contributed javax.swing.text.html, based on HTML 4.01. Sun's
implementation, on the other
+1
Alexey Petrenko wrote:
I agree that we should implement both if it possible. Since we can
easile determine the HTML version by DTD in the header.
SY, Alexey
2006/7/22, Miguel Montes [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
HI all:
Intel has just contributed javax.swing.text.html, based on HTML 4.01.
Which one should we follow? ¿Both? The parser behavior is parameterized by
a DTD, so perhaps we should provide a 3.2 DTD, to be compatible with Sun,
and a 4.01 DTD.
Any ideas?
Miguel Montes
This RFE is about 7 years old and AFAIK SUN does not want to fix it in the
nearest feature:
On 7/22/06, Mikhail Fursov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Which one should we follow? ¿Both? The parser behavior is parameterized
by
a DTD, so perhaps we should provide a 3.2 DTD, to be compatible with
Sun,
and a 4.01 DTD.
Any ideas?
Miguel Montes
This RFE is about 7 years old and AFAIK SUN
10 matches
Mail list logo