[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> 
> Hi Edwin,
> 
> >Well, I was hoping to get the fixes for javax.xml.parsers.* code into
> the next Xerces2 release, but I haven't had time to work on it.
> 
> How about the next Xerces1 release--which was the subject of this message?
> 
> >I think the fix should be to copy the code from the xml-commons repository
> which has the most current version and fixes bugs that are in the
> xml-xerces
> module.
> 
> I thought of doing this for you, so I finally checked out the xml-commons
> module.  The most interesting discovery this led me to is that there are
> two cases (in SAXParserFactory and DocumentBuilderFactory) where
> org.apache.crimson is used as the "fallback implementation".  This is no
> doubt appropriate for crimson, but surely we'd want to modify this for
> xerces...  So while I agree that the best solution would be to have one
> source repository for the jaxp classes, I'm not sure how both xerces and
> crimson can share one repository when they would both appear to need slight
> modifications to some of the files.

The "fallback implementation" that is in the code is unnecessary.  In
fact, I just removed it so now the javax.xml.* classes are totally
implementation neutral and will work in with all implementations I know
of.

> 
> I also noticed that the jaxp files in xml-commons appear to have a
> different origin than the files we have.  That is to say the files in
> xml-commons don't seem to be patched versions of our files, they appear to
> have  come from somewhere else.  While this is fine, I think it points out
> that if/when we do move to using an implementation based on what's in the
> xml-commons module, we'll have to make sure we do lots of testing.

Yes, I believe it's because the code in xml-xerces is a really old
version and has a number of bugs in it.  For example, it doesn't work in
applets IIRC.  The version in xml-commons is what is shipping in the
JAXP RI and in other Sun products so I feel relatively confident that it
is not only a newer version but a less buggy version.

> 
> So I wonder whether it's worth using the code from xml-commons in xerces1,
> since we really only want to fix small bugs there now and using a wholly
> different codebase puts us at risk of regressing.
> 
> Thoughts?

How about if I start working on the copying task right now?  Not sure if
I'll be able to finish before I have to leave work.

-Edwin

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to