Re: A few questions about details

Hi David,

David M Williams <[email protected]> wrote on 04/19/2007 02:52:14 
AM:
 
> On 
> http://xml.apache.org/commons/ 
> 
> I read: 
> 
> Issues Jan-02: our current SAX and JAXP code may not pass the 
> current J2EE CTS test suite, since we have bugfixes 
> above what those CTS tests mandate. If you don't know what that is, 
> you don't care; otherwise ask on commons-dev for 
> an update. 
> 
> So ... I'm asking for an update! :) 
> 
> First, does that Jan-02 mean the second day of January this year, 
> or, the Month of January in the year 2002 ... in which case, 
> I'd assume the comment is completely out of date? 

The Jan-02 there means January 2002. The front page is horribly out of 
date.

> My _real_ reason for asking, is I would like to confirm or 
> disconfirm that the code in xml-apis.jar is the exact same code 
thatwould be 
> available from it's original sources, 

It is not. The Apache version contains many bug fixes and improvements.

> From a quick analysis, for example, when I look at the SAX code from 
> xml-commons-external-1.3.04-src 
> and compare it to the SAX code from 
> 2.0.2 (sax2r3) 
> There is two extra files in the apache version: 
> SecuritySupport.java, and 
> SecuritySupport12.java. 
> 
> So ... I'm wondering, does this sound right? Hava I made a mistake 
> and they really are supposed to be the same? 

That's right. The SecuritySupport classes are only in the Apache version.
 
> Would there be similar small differences in the org.w3c.dom packages
> and javax.xml packages? 

Yes.

> Is there any where these differences are explained or documtned? 

Many of the differences are documented in the change log here [1].

> And ... the _real_ reason I want to know all this, is I am working 
> on creating OSGi bundles for use with Eclipse. 
> And, my end-goal is (mostly) to use the xerces implementation. In 
> which case, I assume I would _have_ to use the 
> sax APIs from Apache not their original source. And, if I do that, 
> any advice on how I should represent the _version_ of those 
> sax APIs? Version 2.0.2.1304xxxxxx (just to sort of reflect it came 
> from xml-commons version 1.3.04? 

1.3.04 represents the version of xml-commons-external as a whole. 
2.0.2.1304 might confuse folks; not sure how you can represent that in a 
self describing way.

> Any advice welcome.

[1] 
http://xml.apache.org/commons/changes.html#version_xml-commons-external-1.3.04


Michael Glavassevich
XML Parser Development
IBM Toronto Lab
E-mail: [email protected]
E-mail: [email protected]