On Thu, Jan 27, 2005 at 10:05:15AM +, Gareth Reakes wrote:
> XML Parsers still have to resolve the DTD for entities, even if you
> don't want to do validation.
Why? If I want to validate using a W3C XML Schema, why do I have to
read the DTD? Are you suggesting that Xerces will read the exte
On Thu, Feb 03, 2005 at 07:39:27AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Recently, we found out that some of our XML text nodes contain the 0x1A
> character. This causes the Xerces parser to throw a Invalid character
> (Unicode: 0x1A) error.
>
> Upon investigating the XML specs, the XML 1.0 Spec doe
[I hope you don't mind an outsider chipping in; apologies otherwise.]
On Mon, Feb 14, 2005 at 02:38:33PM +0100, Alberto Massari wrote:
> At 09.02 12/02/2005 -0800, James Berry wrote:
>
> >[...]
> >Here's a list of potential tasks. Not all of them have to happen, and they
> >certainly won't happ
On Tue, Feb 08, 2005 at 12:29:20PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> How can I set my schema path internally in the program to override the
> value in the XML file?
>
This has been discussed in:
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/XERCESC-1309
The conclusion (courtesy Alberto) was tha
[WRT Gareth Reakes' original observation "XML Parsers still have to resolve
the DTD for entities, even if you don't want to do validation."]
Jesse Pelton wrote on January 28, 2005:
> I think that's correct. Non-validating parsers are allowed to process
> external entities; they're just not requi
On February 16, 2005, Gareth Reakes wrote:
>> In a standalone='yes' case with an external DTD, the author(s)
>> are implicitly saying:
>> 1) the DTD is useful for validation
>> 2) the DTD is not required for well-formedness checking
>>and its processing would not modify document inf
Gareth wrote:
> Does anyone know if we do support solaris 10?
We've been playing with Solaris 10 here. Mostly ok.
There have been a couple of issues on the x86-64 platform:
* The 'configure' script doesn't like selecting 64-bit compiles
under x86-64 Solaris. IIRC, the default "runConfi
On Wed, Apr 13, 2005 Gareth Reakes wrote:
> For absolute confirmation you can ask at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> (make sure to check the archives first!).
Is it archived?
The Apache archives at http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/
have no content for the "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" mailing list.
Michael
-
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/XERCESC-1368?page=comments#action_60399 ]
Michael Fuller commented on XERCESC-1368:
-
We've run into this issue elsewhere in code we maintain. We too make
extensive use of catch(...).
Under Unix,
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/XERCESC-1368?page=comments#action_60410 ]
Michael Fuller commented on XERCESC-1368:
-
Ok: I think I did misinterpret your direction, as I strongly agree
with the tenets espoused in your follow-up.
One
10 matches
Mail list logo
