Thread: [Sax-devel] RE: SAX2 bugs -- please file!
Brought to you by:
dmegginson
From: Nicolas L. <nic...@ub...> - 2001-07-31 17:45:09
|
The question may be completely out of scope here, and I'm readying = myself for a flame mail flood, but how come such a standard end being hosted = on SourceForge ? I have nothing against SourceForge, I do think the idea and the implementation of this site are great, but... Why isn't such a central = piece of XML software (maybe 99% of Java XML parsers include it or support = it) in a more "official" site ? What is the relationship with the version on David Meggison's site (http://www.megginson.com/SAX/Java/index.html) ?=20 Maybe the root question is : why is SAX under the org.xml.sax package, whereas DOM is in the org.w3c.dom ? Why isn't SAX hosted on the W3C = site ? Is there an historical / legal / other reason for this ? Regards, Nicolas >-----Message d'origine----- >De : David Brownell [mailto:da...@pa...] >Envoy=E9 : mardi 31 juillet 2001 19:09 >=C0 : xm...@li...; sax...@li...; >sax...@li... >Objet : SAX2 bugs -- please file! > > >As you know, there's now a SAX project at SourceForge: > > http://sax.sourceforge.net/ > >I'd like to see a "SAX 2.0.1" bugfix release before long, to >get the fixes into proper circulation. So far, most of the >bugs have been javadoc, but there are a handful (mostly for >namespace support) that are behavioral. No signature >changes, of course: code shouldn't break unless it was >relying on those buggy behaviors. > >If you know of any SAX bugs that haven't yet been fixed, >or want to know about the bugs that have been filed/fixed, >please use the bug tracker at SourceForge: > > http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=3D29449&atid=3D396219 > >There's a separate category for new feature requests, and the >CVS history shows the details. For fixes relating to javadoc, >current stuff is linked from the page above. This all builds >on the "SAX2 r2 prerelease" of last December, as well as the >"SAX2-ext 1.0" release (it's just one CVS tree). > >- Dave > > > >------------------------------------------------------------------ >The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>,=20 >an initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis->open.org> > >The list=20 >archives are at=20 >http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/ > >To unsubscribe from this elist send a message with the single word >"unsubscribe" in the body to: xml...@li... > |
From: Bullard, C. L (Len) <clb...@in...> - 2001-07-31 17:55:43
|
Because SAX was developed under Megginson's mentoring by XML-Dev members, not the W3C. SAX is not a standard. It is a good idea done by those who needed it done quickly and precisely. Now the question is where it should be kept for sustainment and future development. Apparently, those who care enough to take change picked SourceForge. Len http://www.mp3.com/LenBullard Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti. Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h -----Original Message----- From: Nicolas LEHUEN [mailto:nic...@ub...] The question may be completely out of scope here, and I'm readying myself for a flame mail flood, but how come such a standard end being hosted on SourceForge ? |
From: John C. <jc...@re...> - 2001-07-31 17:55:44
|
Nicolas LEHUEN wrote: > The question may be completely out of scope here, and I'm readying myself > for a flame mail flood, but how come such a standard end being hosted on > SourceForge ? Because it is a neutral location. > What is the relationship with the version on David Meggison's site > (http://www.megginson.com/SAX/Java/index.html) ? David is turning over SAX to the community. > Maybe the root question is : why is SAX under the org.xml.sax package, > whereas DOM is in the org.w3c.dom ? Why isn't SAX hosted on the W3C site ? > Is there an historical / legal / other reason for this ? SAX is not a W3C product. -- There is / one art || John Cowan <jc...@re...> no more / no less || http://www.reutershealth.com to do / all things || http://www.ccil.org/~cowan with art- / lessness \\ -- Piet Hein |
From: David B. <da...@pa...> - 2001-07-31 18:12:32
|
Ah, foolish me -- I neglected to (a) apologize for the cross-post, (b) ask followups go to just one list. So please consider that corrected. I'll ask that followups go to the sax-devel list, or (if you're not subscribed), to xml-dev ... not to all of the lists! - Dave |
From: Edd D. <ed...@us...> - 2001-07-31 18:20:40
|
On Tue, Jul 31, 2001 at 07:44:58PM +0200, Nicolas LEHUEN wrote: > The question may be completely out of scope here, and I'm readying myself > for a flame mail flood, but how come such a standard end being hosted on > SourceForge ? > > [ ... ] > > Maybe the root question is : why is SAX under the org.xml.sax package, > whereas DOM is in the org.w3c.dom ? Why isn't SAX hosted on the W3C site ? > Is there an historical / legal / other reason for this ? The terrible, terrible truth is that SAX was created collaboratively on this very mailing list. See http://www.megginson.com/SAX/SAX1/history.html for more information. How it succeeded without being under the W3C's aegis, I will never know. -- Edd |