Why is DOMDocument::getElementById const?

Hi. I'm converting an application from 1.7 to 2.4, quite a leap, it turns out. The method DOMElement* DOMDocument::getElementById(.. gives me a pointer to a DOMElement which is read-only, which I don't believe was the case for the old api. It's a const method, but so is getDocumentElement, wh

Re: Compiling 2.4.0 Under Project Builder on MacOS X

On Feb 10, 2004, at 2:57 PM, Han Ming Ong wrote: On Feb 10, 2004, at 12:13 PM, James Berry wrote: (1) Use Xcode instead of Project Builder (Xcode is also available for Mac OS X 10.2, I believe) Xcode is only available for Mac OS X 10.3 Panther. Hi Han Ming, Thanks for the correction. Xcode is o

Re: Compiling 2.4.0 Under Project Builder on MacOS X

On Feb 10, 2004, at 12:13 PM, James Berry wrote: Casey, As noted in the build instructions, Project Builder projects are no longer officially supported, and were not updated starting with Xerces 2.4. The undefined symbols you are being warned about are due to the fact that the Project Build

Re: Compiling 2.4.0 Under Project Builder on MacOS X

Casey, As noted in the build instructions, Project Builder projects are no longer officially supported, and were not updated starting with Xerces 2.4. The undefined symbols you are being warned about are due to the fact that the Project Builder project file doesn't include all the new file

Compiling 2.4.0 Under Project Builder on MacOS X

I figure this is a FAQ sort of thing, but I couldn't find any information through Google or the Apache site, so I'm trying here. I've been a long time Xerces user under MS Windows, and have been trying to move my application over to MacOS X now. When I downloaded the Xerces 2.4.0 package for MacOS

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 22959] - it is not possible to parse a file and edit it after

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 22699] - Memory Leak when remote-DTD occurs in XML-file

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

Problem building samples on redhat 7.2/g++

Hi, On redhat 7.2 Using the binary download, if I follow the instructions for building the samples using runConfigure (with g++) and gmake it fails (link problems). Does anybody have any ideas? Also, has anyone built from the source download on 7.2 using g++? On 8.0 ive had no problems building f

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 22693] - Memory leak in xerces library

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 21518] - Using Xerces-coded programs in Windows XP

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 26561] - Unique Att Spec error when parsing valid XML

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

Re: Release policy for Xerces-C

Hi Berin and Alberto, I think Alberto's suggestion, with Berin's further addition for major releases, makes sense. That's exactly how we did it in Xerces-J when Xerces2-J was spun off: indeed, Xerces1 releases are still available and the branch is still there if anyone cares to do anything

Re: Release policy for Xerces-C

Alberto, Just to be sure I understand, as I understand it with the versioning (major.minor.patch) : x.x.x -> x.x.y then there is an implication that ABI remains the same. x.x.x -> x.y.z then there is an implication the API remains the same (or at least is only extended). I.e. a recompile of re