From: Jeff Suttor <Jeff.Suttor@Sun.COM> - 2003-06-05 03:05:22
hello SAX Developers,
the Java API for XML Processing is being revised as JSR 206 JAXP 1.3:
some of the features of this JAXP revision will require changes to SAX.
a simple example, SAX should be able to report if it is processing XML
1.0 or XML 1.1. this would also be a good opportunity to formally fix
some bugs and evaluate some of the RFEs.
would the SAX community be open to refreshing SAX to accommodate these
changes, bug fixes and RFEs? how about if you could assume the goodness
of leveraging other people helping with the development, documentation,
it is desirable that the official SAX distribution be as spot on as
Jeff Suttor <Jeff.Suttor@...>
From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@me...> - 2003-06-05 12:14:22
At 8:04 PM -0700 6/4/03, Jeff Suttor wrote:
>hello SAX Developers,
>the Java API for XML Processing is being revised as JSR 206 JAXP 1.3:
>some of the features of this JAXP revision will require changes to SAX.
>a simple example, SAX should be able to report if it is processing XML
>1.0 or XML 1.1. this would also be a good opportunity to formally fix
>some bugs and evaluate some of the RFEs.
1. JAXP needs to follow SAX, not the other way around. JAXP 1.3 must
not make changes that are incompatible with SAX.
2. All changes to SAX are made in an open process in which anyone is
free to participate without NDAs, closed mailing lists, payware
compatibility tests, and other mechanisms of control and secrecy. You
(and anyone else) are free to participate in this process. However,
don't expect SAX to acknowledge or accept any decisions made in the
closed Java Community Process.
3. Your knowledge of SAX appears to be incomplete. For instance, SAX
2.0.1 already provides information about the XML version, and has for
some time now.
Unfortunately, Sun's closed process has prevented many parsers from
implementing the new features in SAX because of desires to be
compatible with JAXP. The compatibility tests that verify all public
method signatures are a particular problem. The best thing JSR 206
could do for SAX (and DOM) would be to be acknowledge that these are
not Sun technologies, that Sun does not own or define them, and that
implementations are free to follow the official specifications
instead of whatever out of date version is shipping in the JDK.
Elliotte Rusty Harold
Processing XML with Java (Addison-Wesley, 2002)
From: David Megginson <david@me...> - 2003-06-05 13:56:17
Jeff Suttor writes:
> some of the features of this JAXP revision will require changes to
> SAX. a simple example, SAX should be able to report if it is
> processing XML 1.0 or XML 1.1. this would also be a good
> opportunity to formally fix some bugs and evaluate some of the
SAX 2 has a mechanism for adding extensions without requiring an API
revision. For the sake of compatibility, I highly recommend that JAXP
use those, instead of modifying the core API.
All the best,
David Megginson, david@..., http://www.megginson.com/