Responses inline...

I've had a look at changing Maverick to use jdom 1.0, but as I've never used jdom myself, I am unsure what the changes should be and their implications. I've identified the three place in the Maverick code that need altered. #1 should be fine but I need help on #2 and #3. See below for what I've done so far, with some in-line comments. I gleaned most information from changes.txt in the jdom 1.0 distribution.

#1 and #3 look good. See notes by #2.

#2 ---------------------------------------- public static Map getParams(Element node) { ...

if (value == null)
  /* OLD CODE: Checks for presence of children if no value present
   * getChildren() now removed from v1.0
  if (paramNode.hasChildren())
    value = paramNode.getChildren();
    value = paramNode.getTextTrim();

  /* NEW CODE: Since this method expects what the name/value pair
   * param nodes should look like (from this methods javadoc), is there
   * actually any need to check for child elements?
  value = paramNode.getTextTrim();

Though the javadocs say the that a param should only look like <param name="" value=""/>, there has been support for child elements inside a <param/> for a while. Not sure about others, but I know I have used this 'feature' many times in the past. With that being the case I would do something like this for #2.

List paramChildren = paramNode.getChildren();
if (!paramChildren.isEmpty())
        value = paramChildren;
        value = paramNode.getTextTrim();

What are the thoughts of updating the jdom dependency of maverick? If there are no objections I will do the updates and do a 2.2.4 release.

-- Mike

 :  mike moulton
 :  meltmedia
 :  1429 north 1st street
 :  phoenix  az  85004
 :  mmoulton66    | aim
 :  602.340.9440 | ofc
 :  602.432.2568 | cel
 :  602.340.1003 | fax

SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users.
Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now.

Reply via email to