From jeanneramirez@example.net Wed Dec 03 05:23:32 2003 Return-Path: <jeanneramirez@example.net> Delivered-To: jeanneramirez@example.net Received: (qmail 9892 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2003 05:23:31 -0000 Received: from daedalus.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 3 Dec 2003 05:23:31 -0000 Received: (qmail 14832 invoked by uid 500); 3 Dec 2003 05:23:06 -0000 Delivered-To: jeanneramirez@example.net Received: (qmail 14786 invoked by uid 500); 3 Dec 2003 05:23:05 -0000 Mailing-List: contact jeanneramirez@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: <mailto:jeanneramirez@example.net> list-unsubscribe: <mailto:jeanneramirez@example.net> list-post: <mailto:jeanneramirez@example.net> Reply-To: jeanneramirez@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list jeanneramirez@example.net Received: (qmail 14737 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2003 05:23:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO e2.ny.us.ibm.com) (83.161.120.155) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 3 Dec 2003 05:23:05 -0000 Received: from northrelay02.pok.ibm.com (northrelay02.pok.ibm.com [83.161.120.155]) by e2.ny.us.ibm.com (8.12.10/8.12.2) with ESMTP id hB35NBd6375262; Wed, 3 Dec 2003 00:23:11 -0500 Received: from d25ml04.torolab.ibm.com (d01av02.pok.ibm.com [83.161.120.155]) by northrelay02.pok.ibm.com (8.12.9/NCO/VER6.6) with ESMTP id hB35N9qt215504; Wed, 3 Dec 2003 00:23:09 -0500 Subject: [ANNOUNCEMENT]: Xerces-C 2.4.0 is now available To: jeanneramirez@example.net Cc: jeanneramirez@example.net, jeanneramirez@example.net X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.7 March 21, 2001 Message-ID: <jeanneramirez@example.net> From: Neil Graham <jeanneramirez@example.net> Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 00:23:09 -0500 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on D25ML04/25/M/IBM(Release 6.0.2CF1|June 9, 2003) at 12/03/2003 00:23:09 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N The Xerces-C team is happy to announce that Xerces-C 2.4.0 is now available. There are several major enhancements in this release: - An API has been implemented that provides applications access to the Post-Schema Validation Infoset; - Grammars which are created by one parser may now be persisted after the destruction of that parser, and they may also be shared among parsers on different threads; - Grammar-caching API's have been improved and an enriched entity-resolution API has been added; - Grammars may now be serialized to a binary format that permits fast reconstruction of the original grammars at a later date. More details about the changes in this release may be foundhere [1], and the release may be downloaded from here [2]; please bear in mind that mirrors may take some time to become synchronized. Enjoy! Neil [1]: http://xml.apache.org/xerces-c/releases.html [2]: http://xml.apache.org/xerces-c/download.cgi/ Neil Graham XML Parser Development IBM Toronto Lab Phone: (544)468-3419, T/L 969-3519 E-mail: jeanneramirez@example.net --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: jeanneramirez@example.net For additional commands, e-mail: jeanneramirez@example.net From jeanneramirez@example.net Wed Dec 03 05:41:57 2003 Return-Path: <jeanneramirez@example.net> Delivered-To: jeanneramirez@example.net Received: (qmail 16782 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2003 05:41:57 -0000 Received: from daedalus.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 3 Dec 2003 05:41:57 -0000 Received: (qmail 32603 invoked by uid 500); 3 Dec 2003 05:41:32 -0000 Delivered-To: jeanneramirez@example.net Received: (qmail 32568 invoked by uid 500); 3 Dec 2003 05:41:32 -0000 Mailing-List: contact jeanneramirez@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: <mailto:jeanneramirez@example.net> list-unsubscribe: <mailto:jeanneramirez@example.net> list-post: <mailto:jeanneramirez@example.net> Reply-To: jeanneramirez@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list jeanneramirez@example.net Delivered-To: moderator for jeanneramirez@example.net Received: (qmail 99828 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2003 04:58:53 -0000 Message-ID: <jeanneramirez@example.net> From: "Srilakshmanan, Lakshman" <jeanneramirez@example.net> To: "'jeanneramirez@example.net'" <jeanneramirez@example.net> Subject: xml-apis.jar Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 15:57:35 +1100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Hi Is there any reason why xml-apis.jar does not have a version number eg xml-apis-1.0.jar. There is an xml-apis.jar in fop-0.20.5-bin.zip and I can't version control it. Any help will be appreciated. Thanks lakshman Australia Post is committed to providing our customers with excellent service. If we can assist you in any way please either telephone 13 13 18 or visit our website www.auspost.com.au. CAUTION This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are privileged and confidential information intended for the use of the addressee. The confidentiality and/or privilege in this e-mail is not waived, lost or destroyed if it has been transmitted to you in error. If you have received this e-mail in error you must (a) not disseminate, copy or take any action in reliance on it; (b) please notify Australia Post immediately by return e-mail to the sender; and (c) please delete the original e-mail. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: jeanneramirez@example.net For additional commands, e-mail: jeanneramirez@example.net From jeanneramirez@example.net Wed Dec 03 10:53:05 2003 Return-Path: <jeanneramirez@example.net> Delivered-To: jeanneramirez@example.net Received: (qmail 54821 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2003 10:53:05 -0000 Received: from daedalus.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 3 Dec 2003 10:53:05 -0000 Received: (qmail 1407 invoked by uid 500); 3 Dec 2003 10:52:33 -0000 Delivered-To: jeanneramirez@example.net Received: (qmail 1379 invoked by uid 500); 3 Dec 2003 10:52:33 -0000 Mailing-List: contact jeanneramirez@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: <mailto:jeanneramirez@example.net> list-unsubscribe: <mailto:jeanneramirez@example.net> list-post: <mailto:jeanneramirez@example.net> Reply-To: jeanneramirez@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list jeanneramirez@example.net Received: (qmail 1354 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2003 10:52:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO smta10.mail.ozemail.net) (83.161.120.155) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 3 Dec 2003 10:52:32 -0000 Received: from ozemail.com.au ([83.161.120.155]) by smta10.mail.ozemail.net with ESMTP id <jeanneramirez@example.net>; Wed, 3 Dec 2003 10:51:42 +0000 Message-ID: <jeanneramirez@example.net> Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2003 21:23:22 +1100 From: Berin Lautenbach <jeanneramirez@example.net> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-GB; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030831 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: pmc <jeanneramirez@example.net>, jeanneramirez@example.net Subject: [Fwd: Re: XML PMC and Oversight] X-Enigmail-Version: 83.161.120.155 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Well, a bit of time has gone by. I thought I'd raise this again and see where we were. Would be interested in people's thoughts on the idea below. If we were to go down this path, we would need to put a transition plan in place to make it all work. Would also be interested in whether people have been following the idea of PPMCs in the Incubator. In essence, each sub-project has it's own PMC (the PPMC) which is made up of the key players in the sub-project. Also in the PPMC are all the members of the PMC. The latter are there purely to provide oversite - i.e. ensure that decisions are being made appropriately and in the Apache style. Might be adaptable to the XML project. Thoughts? Ideally we want to get something agreed for the December board meeting. I'm not convinced we will manage that, but we should have some kind of progress report. Cheers, Berin -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: XML PMC and Oversight Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 20:08:54 +1100 From: Berin Lautenbach <jeanneramirez@example.net> Reply-To: jeanneramirez@example.net To: jeanneramirez@example.net, jeanneramirez@example.net, jeanneramirez@example.net References: <20031120220612.VLFA27218.swebmail00.mail.ozemail.net@localhost> <jeanneramirez@example.net> Greg Stein wrote: > The Board *would* prefer to see more TLPs rather than complicated > structures under one large PMC. The problem here is based on one PMC > trying to oversee way too many projects. Partitioning should help. So, (after much thought and rumination), can we just turn XML into a federation of TLPs with a common web site, e-mail etc? Most of the projects in XML would stand on their own, with one or two exceptions that we could look at gathering together to create a single TLP. For those that don't particularly want to set up their own web site, change e-mail lists etc. leave everything as it currently is and have a group of vulunteers from each member project of the group who take care of those issues. Means a few more TLPs = more PMCs for the board to look after, but might fit more with the spirit of what you are looking for. At the same time, it prevents an explosion of web-sites and all the stuff that comes with a TLP. Any current sub-project preferring their own web site etc. could head down that path. But keeping everything together gives the grouping of projects (I believe) a greater focus and wider community. Also, we could leave the current smaller sub-projects in XML, but have the XML PMC reduced to members in those sub-projects and require they be accross all of them (i.e. an active part of -dev in each). Cheers, Berin --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: jeanneramirez@example.net For additional commands, e-mail: jeanneramirez@example.net From jeanneramirez@example.net Wed Dec 03 13:28:30 2003 Return-Path: <jeanneramirez@example.net> Delivered-To: jeanneramirez@example.net Received: (qmail 49223 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2003 13:28:30 -0000 Received: from daedalus.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 3 Dec 2003 13:28:30 -0000 Received: (qmail 46033 invoked by uid 500); 3 Dec 2003 13:27:57 -0000 Delivered-To: jeanneramirez@example.net Received: (qmail 45973 invoked by uid 500); 3 Dec 2003 13:27:56 -0000 Mailing-List: contact jeanneramirez@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: <mailto:jeanneramirez@example.net> list-unsubscribe: <mailto:jeanneramirez@example.net> list-post: <mailto:jeanneramirez@example.net> Reply-To: jeanneramirez@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list jeanneramirez@example.net Received: (qmail 45875 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2003 13:27:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO uni-sb.de) (83.161.120.155) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 3 Dec 2003 13:27:56 -0000 Received: from cs.uni-sb.de (cs.uni-sb.de [83.161.120.155]) by uni-sb.de (8.12.10/2003073000) with ESMTP id hB3DRtjk018146 for <jeanneramirez@example.net>; Wed, 3 Dec 2003 14:27:55 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail.cs.uni-sb.de (mail.cs.uni-sb.de [83.161.120.155]) by cs.uni-sb.de (8.12.10/2003091100) with ESMTP id hB3DRsRN008386 for <jeanneramirez@example.net>; Wed, 3 Dec 2003 14:27:54 +0100 (CET) Received: from activemath.org (klein.ags.uni-sb.de [83.161.120.155]) by mail.cs.uni-sb.de (8.12.10/2003073000) with ESMTP id hB3DRrTX012327 for <jeanneramirez@example.net>; Wed, 3 Dec 2003 14:27:54 +0100 (CET) X-Authentication-Warning: email: Host klein.ags.uni-sb.de [83.161.120.155] claimed to be activemath.org Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 14:24:07 +0100 Subject: Re: xml-apis.jar Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v553) From: Paul Libbrecht <jeanneramirez@example.net> To: jeanneramirez@example.net Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In-Reply-To: <jeanneramirez@example.net> Message-Id: <jeanneramirez@example.net> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.553) X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Lakshman, XML-APIs is a kind of pack which is not very elegant but is sadly=20 necesary... It contains - sax (2.0.1 I think) - dom (2 xx I think) - jaxp (1.1 I think) The reason it's necessary is jaxp: this package has such a weird=20 license (and Sun never really understood itself on how to license it)=20 that you'd better not see it and trust Apache that it is under Apache=20 license... (there has been several debates on that and I think this is actually=20 partially). It would be brave that someone makes it official... Or request JDK 1.4. Paul PS: sorry to be so negative but my experience thus far with JAXP=20 license was the worst I ever had... I hope to have offended no-one. On Mercredi, d=E9ce 3, 2003, at 05:57 Europe/Paris, Srilakshmanan,=20 Lakshman wrote: > Is there any reason why xml-apis.jar does not have a version number eg > xml-apis-1.0.jar. > > There is an xml-apis.jar in fop-0.20.5-bin.zip and I can't version=20 > control > it. > > Any help will be appreciated. > > Thanks > lakshman --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: jeanneramirez@example.net For additional commands, e-mail: jeanneramirez@example.net From jeanneramirez@example.net Wed Dec 03 23:07:15 2003 Return-Path: <jeanneramirez@example.net> Delivered-To: jeanneramirez@example.net Received: (qmail 93859 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2003 23:07:15 -0000 Received: from daedalus.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 3 Dec 2003 23:07:15 -0000 Received: (qmail 23748 invoked by uid 500); 3 Dec 2003 23:06:32 -0000 Delivered-To: jeanneramirez@example.net Received: (qmail 23623 invoked by uid 500); 3 Dec 2003 23:06:31 -0000 Mailing-List: contact jeanneramirez@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: <mailto:jeanneramirez@example.net> list-unsubscribe: <mailto:jeanneramirez@example.net> list-post: <mailto:jeanneramirez@example.net> Reply-To: jeanneramirez@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list jeanneramirez@example.net Received: (qmail 23459 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2003 23:06:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.sergeant.org) (83.161.120.155) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 3 Dec 2003 23:06:30 -0000 Received: (qmail 7592 invoked by uid 1233); 3 Dec 2003 23:06:40 -0000 Received: from 83.161.120.155.in-addr.arpa (HELO [83.161.120.155]) (83.161.120.155) by mail.sergeant.org (qpsmtpd/0.27-dev) with ESMTP; Wed, 03 Dec 2003 23:06:39 +0000 In-Reply-To: <jeanneramirez@example.net> References: <jeanneramirez@example.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v604) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Message-Id: <jeanneramirez@example.net> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: jeanneramirez@example.net From: Matt Sergeant <jeanneramirez@example.net> Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: XML PMC and Oversight] Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 23:06:31 +0000 To: jeanneramirez@example.net X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.604) X-Virus-Checked: Checked X-Spam-Status: X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N On 3 Dec 2003, at 10:23, Berin Lautenbach wrote: > Well, a bit of time has gone by. I thought I'd raise this again and > see where we were. > > Would be interested in people's thoughts on the idea below. If we > were to go down this path, we would need to put a transition plan in > place to make it all work. > > Would also be interested in whether people have been following the > idea of PPMCs in the Incubator. In essence, each sub-project has it's > own PMC (the PPMC) which is made up of the key players in the > sub-project. Also in the PPMC are all the members of the PMC. The > latter are there purely to provide oversite - i.e. ensure that > decisions are being made appropriately and in the Apache style. > > Might be adaptable to the XML project. > > Thoughts? Ideally we want to get something agreed for the December > board meeting. I'm not convinced we will manage that, but we should > have some kind of progress report. I worry a little that we're changing things that won't help anything. If there's lack of oversight right now, changing the group structure won't help attain more oversight. These are small projects here in XML land, and people only have a finite amount of time to devote to them. Making projects like AxKit the equivalent of a TLP within a cluster of other TLPs won't change the way AxKit is run. More tuits after you pluck them from the trees might :-) Maybe a "Simon Says" system could help. If we want to do a release we have to ask, like asking for a new committer. It sounds kind of anal, but then so are the ASF legal requirements (for a reason - I don't mean "anal" in an insulting way). I do admit to not feeling very close to the problems occurring here, so take what I say with a big pinch of salt. Matt. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: jeanneramirez@example.net For additional commands, e-mail: jeanneramirez@example.net From jeanneramirez@example.net Wed Dec 03 23:40:39 2003 Return-Path: <jeanneramirez@example.net> Delivered-To: jeanneramirez@example.net Received: (qmail 10875 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2003 23:40:39 -0000 Received: from daedalus.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 3 Dec 2003 23:40:39 -0000 Received: (qmail 70008 invoked by uid 500); 3 Dec 2003 23:40:07 -0000 Delivered-To: jeanneramirez@example.net Received: (qmail 69977 invoked by uid 500); 3 Dec 2003 23:40:06 -0000 Mailing-List: contact jeanneramirez@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: <mailto:jeanneramirez@example.net> list-unsubscribe: <mailto:jeanneramirez@example.net> list-post: <mailto:jeanneramirez@example.net> Reply-To: jeanneramirez@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list jeanneramirez@example.net Received: (qmail 69958 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2003 23:40:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO web60110.mail.yahoo.com) (83.161.120.155) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 3 Dec 2003 23:40:06 -0000 Message-ID: <jeanneramirez@example.net> Received: from [83.161.120.155] by web60110.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Wed, 03 Dec 2003 15:40:12 PST Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 15:40:12 -0800 (PST) From: Glen Mazza <jeanneramirez@example.net> Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: XML PMC and Oversight] To: jeanneramirez@example.net, jeanneramirez@example.net In-Reply-To: <jeanneramirez@example.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N --- Berin Lautenbach <jeanneramirez@example.net> wrote: > Would also be interested in whether people have been > following the idea > of PPMCs in the Incubator. Couldn't find the thread--what does the PPMC acronym stand for? Also, are the specific oversight requirements of Apache board available online somewhere? It might be easier to determine the correct path to go once everyone is aware of what needs to be done. > In essence, each > sub-project has it's own > PMC (the PPMC) which is made up of the key players > in the sub-project. But wasn't the Apache board's original concern that a subproject's committers, by themselves, are not sufficient to ensure quality of work? We should be careful that a subset of the same people, even if they are the "key players", will alleviate those concerns. > Also in the PPMC are all the members of the PMC. > The latter are there > purely to provide oversite - i.e. ensure that > decisions are being made > appropriately and in the Apache style. > But I thought the reason for moving to subproject PPMC's to begin with was that the XML PMC members did *not* have the time to do subproject oversight at the granularity that the Apache board wanted. How will available time for the XML PMC members to do this oversight work materialize as a result of them joining the PPMCs? My general caution would be that XML Apache should be careful not to make any organizational changes if those changes won't satisfy the board's needs. In particular, if the requirements are simply too time-consuming no matter how you restructure things, it would probably be better to work on that problem first before considering PPMC's. Glen Mazza Apache FOP Team __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now http://companion.yahoo.com/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: jeanneramirez@example.net For additional commands, e-mail: jeanneramirez@example.net From jeanneramirez@example.net Thu Dec 04 07:23:05 2003 Return-Path: <jeanneramirez@example.net> Delivered-To: jeanneramirez@example.net Received: (qmail 73642 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2003 07:23:04 -0000 Received: from daedalus.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 4 Dec 2003 07:23:04 -0000 Received: (qmail 47965 invoked by uid 500); 4 Dec 2003 07:22:25 -0000 Delivered-To: jeanneramirez@example.net Received: (qmail 47953 invoked by uid 500); 4 Dec 2003 07:22:25 -0000 Mailing-List: contact jeanneramirez@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: <mailto:jeanneramirez@example.net> list-unsubscribe: <mailto:jeanneramirez@example.net> list-post: <mailto:jeanneramirez@example.net> Reply-To: jeanneramirez@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list jeanneramirez@example.net Delivered-To: moderator for jeanneramirez@example.net Received: (qmail 85507 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2003 05:45:44 -0000 To: jeanneramirez@example.net Cc: jeanneramirez@example.net Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: XML PMC and Oversight] References: <jeanneramirez@example.net> <jeanneramirez@example.net> From: jeanneramirez@example.net (Jason E. Stewart) Date: 04 Dec 2003 10:25:53 +0530 In-Reply-To: <jeanneramirez@example.net> Message-ID: <jeanneramirez@example.net> Lines: 19 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) XEmacs/21.4 (Honest Recruiter) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: "Jason E. Stewart" <jeanneramirez@example.net> X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Matt Sergeant <jeanneramirez@example.net> writes: > I worry a little that we're changing things that won't help > anything. If there's lack of oversight right now, changing the group > structure won't help attain more oversight. These are small projects > here in XML land, and people only have a finite amount of time to > devote to them. Making projects like AxKit the equivalent of a TLP > within a cluster of other TLPs won't change the way AxKit is run. I agree with Matt here. If some could explain why changing the structure of the of things is going to help get better oversight for a single committer project like Xerces-P, I would be grateful. > More tuits after you pluck them from the trees might :-) If only they were on sale at the corner dosa wala... Cheers, jas. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: jeanneramirez@example.net For additional commands, e-mail: jeanneramirez@example.net From jeanneramirez@example.net Thu Dec 04 10:40:50 2003 Return-Path: <jeanneramirez@example.net> Delivered-To: jeanneramirez@example.net Received: (qmail 83326 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2003 10:40:49 -0000 Received: from daedalus.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 4 Dec 2003 10:40:49 -0000 Received: (qmail 74867 invoked by uid 500); 4 Dec 2003 10:40:07 -0000 Delivered-To: jeanneramirez@example.net Received: (qmail 74625 invoked by uid 500); 4 Dec 2003 10:40:06 -0000 Mailing-List: contact jeanneramirez@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: <mailto:jeanneramirez@example.net> list-unsubscribe: <mailto:jeanneramirez@example.net> list-post: <mailto:jeanneramirez@example.net> Reply-To: jeanneramirez@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list jeanneramirez@example.net Received: (qmail 74611 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2003 10:40:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO smta00.mail.ozemail.net) (83.161.120.155) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 4 Dec 2003 10:40:05 -0000 Received: from ozemail.com.au ([83.161.120.155]) by smta00.mail.ozemail.net with ESMTP id <jeanneramirez@example.net> for <jeanneramirez@example.net>; Thu, 4 Dec 2003 10:39:26 +0000 Message-ID: <jeanneramirez@example.net> Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2003 21:40:16 +1100 From: Berin Lautenbach <jeanneramirez@example.net> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-GB; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030831 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: jeanneramirez@example.net Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: XML PMC and Oversight] References: <jeanneramirez@example.net> <jeanneramirez@example.net> In-Reply-To: <jeanneramirez@example.net> X-Enigmail-Version: 83.161.120.155 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Matt Sergeant wrote: > I worry a little that we're changing things that won't help anything. If > there's lack of oversight right now, changing the group structure won't > help attain more oversight. These are small projects here in XML land, > and people only have a finite amount of time to devote to them. Making > projects like AxKit the equivalent of a TLP within a cluster of other > TLPs won't change the way AxKit is run. Your last sentence is absolutely spot on the mark. But it's actually the point why the federation might be the right approach. As I read things, many (not all) of the XML projects are actually doing their own internal oversite in much the way a PMC is expected to do oversite of a TLP. I.e. reviewing code commits, planning code changes, approving releases etc. The problem is not with what you are doing inside the sub-project, the problem is what we are doing inside the PMC to validate it. Under the bylaws it doesn't matter that the sub-project is doing everything perfectly. The PMC has to validate it. (It's all around legal oversite and liability as I understand it.) So if we make AxKit (for example) a TLP, then you can *almost* keep doing things the way you are now. You would have to appoint a chair and PMC of your own (probably just formalising a group you already have) and report directly to the board. Even that we might be able to do as we do today - everyone reporting in a combined report once a quarter. The difference would be that *the right people* - i.e. yourselves - have the responsibility of reviewing your own code and releases. Given you are already doing that, it seems like a win-win to me :>. Other than that - you can change as much as you want. With the federation approach, we can all keep working together (if we so desire) within the XML web-site and mailing lists, so nothing changes there, and all us little projects can help each other out with this infrastructure stuff :>. > > More tuits after you pluck them from the trees might :-) > > Maybe a "Simon Says" system could help. If we want to do a release we > have to ask, like asking for a new committer. It sounds kind of anal, > but then so are the ASF legal requirements (for a reason - I don't mean > "anal" in an insulting way). > > I do admit to not feeling very close to the problems occurring here, so > take what I say with a big pinch of salt. Not at all! I tend to agree that adding new structures isn't necessarily going to solve the problem. But formalising what we currently have might. Effectively we are simply removing a level of middle-management and letting people get on with what it is they want to do. Cheers, Berin --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: jeanneramirez@example.net For additional commands, e-mail: jeanneramirez@example.net From jeanneramirez@example.net Thu Dec 04 10:47:03 2003 Return-Path: <jeanneramirez@example.net> Delivered-To: jeanneramirez@example.net Received: (qmail 86349 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2003 10:47:03 -0000 Received: from daedalus.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 4 Dec 2003 10:47:03 -0000 Received: (qmail 85224 invoked by uid 500); 4 Dec 2003 10:46:19 -0000 Delivered-To: jeanneramirez@example.net Received: (qmail 85185 invoked by uid 500); 4 Dec 2003 10:46:19 -0000 Mailing-List: contact jeanneramirez@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: <mailto:jeanneramirez@example.net> list-unsubscribe: <mailto:jeanneramirez@example.net> list-post: <mailto:jeanneramirez@example.net> Reply-To: jeanneramirez@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list jeanneramirez@example.net Received: (qmail 85171 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2003 10:46:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO smta00.mail.ozemail.net) (83.161.120.155) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 4 Dec 2003 10:46:19 -0000 Received: from ozemail.com.au ([83.161.120.155]) by smta00.mail.ozemail.net with ESMTP id <jeanneramirez@example.net> for <jeanneramirez@example.net>; Thu, 4 Dec 2003 10:45:40 +0000 Message-ID: <jeanneramirez@example.net> Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2003 21:46:30 +1100 From: Berin Lautenbach <jeanneramirez@example.net> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-GB; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030831 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: jeanneramirez@example.net Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: XML PMC and Oversight] References: <jeanneramirez@example.net> In-Reply-To: <jeanneramirez@example.net> X-Enigmail-Version: 83.161.120.155 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Glen Mazza wrote: > --- Berin Lautenbach <jeanneramirez@example.net> wrote: > >>Would also be interested in whether people have been >>following the idea >>of PPMCs in the Incubator. > > > Couldn't find the thread--what does the PPMC acronym > stand for? Also, are the specific oversight > requirements of Apache board available online > somewhere? It might be easier to determine the > correct path to go once everyone is aware of what > needs to be done. PPMC = Practice PMC. Basically the group that will become the PMC when the project comes out of incubation. > > >>In essence, each >>sub-project has it's own >>PMC (the PPMC) which is made up of the key players >>in the sub-project. > > > But wasn't the Apache board's original concern that a > subproject's committers, by themselves, are not > sufficient to ensure quality of work? We should be > careful that a subset of the same people, even if they > are the "key players", will alleviate those concerns. No - very important point! The board's concern was that the PMC, the legally responsible entity, wasn't doing enough to ensure the quality of the work. There was never a comment in any way on how well the individual sub-projects were doing quality control. So it may that each project is doing everything perfectly. We just have to find a way to either get that level of visibility in the PMC or remove the middle layer that is adding no value and give each sub-project the ability to drive its own destiny (as they are doing already :>). > > > >>Also in the PPMC are all the members of the PMC. >>The latter are there >>purely to provide oversite - i.e. ensure that >>decisions are being made >>appropriately and in the Apache style. >> > > > But I thought the reason for moving to subproject > PPMC's to begin with was that the XML PMC members did > *not* have the time to do subproject oversight at the > granularity that the Apache board wanted. > > How will available time for the XML PMC members to do > this oversight work materialize as a result of them > joining the PPMCs? > A fair call - and my main niggle with this approach for XML. > My general caution would be that XML Apache should be > careful not to make any organizational changes if > those changes won't satisfy the board's needs. In > particular, if the requirements are simply too > time-consuming no matter how you restructure things, > it would probably be better to work on that problem > first before considering PPMC's. Yup. It's why I'm leaning more towards the federation idea. Each project just does what it does today, but does so within the framework of the foundation. Cheers, Berin --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: jeanneramirez@example.net For additional commands, e-mail: jeanneramirez@example.net From jeanneramirez@example.net Thu Dec 04 10:51:46 2003 Return-Path: <jeanneramirez@example.net> Delivered-To: jeanneramirez@example.net Received: (qmail 88594 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2003 10:51:45 -0000 Received: from daedalus.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 4 Dec 2003 10:51:45 -0000 Received: (qmail 95554 invoked by uid 500); 4 Dec 2003 10:51:01 -0000 Delivered-To: jeanneramirez@example.net Received: (qmail 95514 invoked by uid 500); 4 Dec 2003 10:51:01 -0000 Mailing-List: contact jeanneramirez@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: <mailto:jeanneramirez@example.net> list-unsubscribe: <mailto:jeanneramirez@example.net> list-post: <mailto:jeanneramirez@example.net> Reply-To: jeanneramirez@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list jeanneramirez@example.net Received: (qmail 95438 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2003 10:51:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO smta00.mail.ozemail.net) (83.161.120.155) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 4 Dec 2003 10:51:00 -0000 Received: from ozemail.com.au ([83.161.120.155]) by smta00.mail.ozemail.net with ESMTP id <jeanneramirez@example.net>; Thu, 4 Dec 2003 10:50:21 +0000 Message-ID: <jeanneramirez@example.net> Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2003 21:51:11 +1100 From: Berin Lautenbach <jeanneramirez@example.net> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-GB; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030831 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: jeanneramirez@example.net CC: jeanneramirez@example.net Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: XML PMC and Oversight] References: <jeanneramirez@example.net> <jeanneramirez@example.net> <jeanneramirez@example.net> In-Reply-To: <jeanneramirez@example.net> X-Enigmail-Version: 83.161.120.155 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Jason E. Stewart wrote: >>I worry a little that we're changing things that won't help >>anything. If there's lack of oversight right now, changing the group >>structure won't help attain more oversight. These are small projects >>here in XML land, and people only have a finite amount of time to >>devote to them. Making projects like AxKit the equivalent of a TLP >>within a cluster of other TLPs won't change the way AxKit is run. > > > I agree with Matt here. If some could explain why changing the > structure of the of things is going to help get better oversight for a > single committer project like Xerces-P, I would be grateful. Fair call. It won't. There is no single answer to the overall problem. However doing what you have been talking about in previous e-mail would work. If you join in with Xerces, then the Xerces-J and Xerces-C developers can help you in that review process (and I would imagine the opposite is also true). If we head down a federation path, then nothing changes for the three Xerces projects, other than they become their own TLP. I think that's small enough that effective overview can be provided. > > >>More tuits after you pluck them from the trees might :-) > > > If only they were on sale at the corner dosa wala... <GRIN/> Cheers, Berin --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: jeanneramirez@example.net For additional commands, e-mail: jeanneramirez@example.net From jeanneramirez@example.net Thu Dec 04 12:43:08 2003 Return-Path: <jeanneramirez@example.net> Delivered-To: jeanneramirez@example.net Received: (qmail 82134 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2003 12:43:07 -0000 Received: from daedalus.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 4 Dec 2003 12:43:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 59145 invoked by uid 500); 4 Dec 2003 12:43:01 -0000 Delivered-To: jeanneramirez@example.net Received: (qmail 59100 invoked by uid 500); 4 Dec 2003 12:43:01 -0000 Mailing-List: contact jeanneramirez@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: <mailto:jeanneramirez@example.net> list-unsubscribe: <mailto:jeanneramirez@example.net> list-post: <mailto:jeanneramirez@example.net> Reply-To: jeanneramirez@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list jeanneramirez@example.net Received: (qmail 59081 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2003 12:43:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail4.tpgi.com.au) (83.161.120.155) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 4 Dec 2003 12:43:00 -0000 Received: from floozie.harem (544)468-3419-bri-ts4-2600.tpgi.com.au [83.161.120.155]) by mail4.tpgi.com.au (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id hB4CguL3012513 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=NO); Thu, 4 Dec 2003 23:42:58 +1100 Received: from powerup.com.au (localhost.localdomain [83.161.120.155]) by floozie.harem (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id hB4CYYMQ003804; Thu, 4 Dec 2003 22:34:35 +1000 Message-ID: <jeanneramirez@example.net> Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2003 22:34:34 +1000 From: "Peter B. West" <jeanneramirez@example.net> Organization: The Spanish Inquisition User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031016 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: jeanneramirez@example.net CC: jeanneramirez@example.net Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: XML PMC and Oversight] References: <jeanneramirez@example.net> <jeanneramirez@example.net> <jeanneramirez@example.net> <jeanneramirez@example.net> In-Reply-To: <jeanneramirez@example.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-TPG-Antivirus: Passed X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Watching this ongoing discussion, I am puzzled by the underlying assumptions. My naive view of Apache is that products are provided "as-is", with all care and no responsibility. A primary duty of the Board is to provide for the well-being of Open Source software development under the Apache banner. That means, inter alia, protecting the integrity of existing (sub)project releases, cultivating the Apache developer base, promoting Open Source software development generally and Apache OSSD in particular, bringing online new projects that fall within the Apache area of interest, and protecting the good name of the ASF. The requested changes, as far as I can tell, are being promoted as being required on legal advice. That seems to me to get the cart before the horse. If the functions of the Board seem to require certain changes, how about explaining and justifying them in terms of what we all expect of the Board? When I hear that "the lawyers said so," I always smell a rat, to put it bluntly. If, instead, we were to hear that the functions of the Board are not being fulfilled under current arrangements, and that this is what the Board proposed to do about it, then the discussion could proceed towards consensus on what functions are proper to the Board, and, given that agreement, to precisely how they were best fulfilled. If, in the course of the discussion, there is disquiet about the proposals, it seems to me that, rather than saying, "it's the lawyers," a consensus approach would be to isolate those elements in the Constitution which are generating the problematical demands, and talk to the lawyers about changing them to reflect to reflect the concerns of the community of developers. That doesn't seem to be happening. One other interesting aspect of the debate is that it *appears* that the Board wishes the detailed oversight of, say, code quality, in a sub-project to occur at a level similar to the current project, and yet for the (current) sub-projects to report their status individually to the Board. This is my reading of the comment that the Board can whiz through all of the extra reports without any strain. If it's so simple, it doesn't amount to much of an oversight. If the hard yakka of code reviews and quality oversight is still within, e.g. the XML project, why not take one report from XML. I assume I've missed the point. Peter -- Peter B. West <http://www.powerup.com.au/~pbwest/resume.html> --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: jeanneramirez@example.net For additional commands, e-mail: jeanneramirez@example.net From jeanneramirez@example.net Thu Dec 04 22:41:05 2003 Return-Path: <jeanneramirez@example.net> Delivered-To: jeanneramirez@example.net Received: (qmail 65459 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2003 22:41:05 -0000 Received: from daedalus.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 4 Dec 2003 22:41:05 -0000 Received: (qmail 9995 invoked by uid 500); 4 Dec 2003 22:40:46 -0000 Delivered-To: jeanneramirez@example.net Received: (qmail 9962 invoked by uid 500); 4 Dec 2003 22:40:46 -0000 Mailing-List: contact jeanneramirez@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: <mailto:jeanneramirez@example.net> list-unsubscribe: <mailto:jeanneramirez@example.net> list-post: <mailto:jeanneramirez@example.net> Reply-To: jeanneramirez@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list jeanneramirez@example.net Received: (qmail 9883 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2003 22:40:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.sergeant.org) (83.161.120.155) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 4 Dec 2003 22:40:45 -0000 Received: (qmail 27059 invoked by uid 1233); 4 Dec 2003 22:40:55 -0000 Received: from 83.161.120.155.in-addr.arpa (HELO [83.161.120.155]) (83.161.120.155) by mail.sergeant.org (qpsmtpd/0.27-dev) with ESMTP; Thu, 04 Dec 2003 22:40:54 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v604) In-Reply-To: <jeanneramirez@example.net> References: <jeanneramirez@example.net> <jeanneramirez@example.net> <jeanneramirez@example.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Message-Id: <jeanneramirez@example.net> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Matt Sergeant <jeanneramirez@example.net> Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: XML PMC and Oversight] Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 22:40:47 +0000 To: jeanneramirez@example.net X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.604) X-Virus-Checked: Checked X-Spam-Status: X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N On 4 Dec 2003, at 10:40, Berin Lautenbach wrote: > So if we make AxKit (for example) a TLP, then you can *almost* keep > doing things the way you are now. You would have to appoint a chair > and PMC of your own (probably just formalising a group you already > have) and report directly to the board. Even that we might be able to > do as we do today - everyone reporting in a combined report once a > quarter. > > The difference would be that *the right people* - i.e. yourselves - > have the responsibility of reviewing your own code and releases. > Given you are already doing that, it seems like a win-win to me :>. > > Other than that - you can change as much as you want. With the > federation approach, we can all keep working together (if we so > desire) within the XML web-site and mailing lists, so nothing changes > there, and all us little projects can help each other out with this > infrastructure stuff :>. I guess I would come back with the fact that I *like* the XML PMC as middle management here. They remind me and prod me when I need to do something. Without them, I'd be reporting direct to the board, and that doesn't scale. I think I see what you're saying though - it's not the sub-projects that are failing, it's the PMC members in XML that are failing to keep an overview on all the projects. Unfortunately that might once again come down to picking tuits off trees. :-/ I guess there's no easy answers to this. Matt. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: jeanneramirez@example.net For additional commands, e-mail: jeanneramirez@example.net From jeanneramirez@example.net Fri Dec 05 23:37:04 2003 Return-Path: <jeanneramirez@example.net> Delivered-To: jeanneramirez@example.net Received: (qmail 28187 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2003 23:37:04 -0000 Received: from daedalus.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 5 Dec 2003 23:37:04 -0000 Received: (qmail 60976 invoked by uid 500); 5 Dec 2003 23:36:46 -0000 Delivered-To: jeanneramirez@example.net Received: (qmail 60829 invoked by uid 500); 5 Dec 2003 23:36:45 -0000 Mailing-List: contact jeanneramirez@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: <mailto:jeanneramirez@example.net> list-unsubscribe: <mailto:jeanneramirez@example.net> list-post: <mailto:jeanneramirez@example.net> Reply-To: jeanneramirez@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list jeanneramirez@example.net Delivered-To: moderator for jeanneramirez@example.net Received: (qmail 92189 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2003 09:37:09 -0000 Message-ID: <jeanneramirez@example.net> From: "gayatri" <jeanneramirez@example.net> To: <jeanneramirez@example.net> Subject: Issue with Crimson Parser Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 14:26:51 +0530 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0068_01C3BB3B.D2DF73F0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: jeanneramirez@example.net X-Return-Path: jeanneramirez@example.net X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N ------=_NextPart_000_0068_01C3BB3B.D2DF73F0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, I have a very serious issue, that might affect my project as a whole.=20 My Project involves conversion of an Input XML file to an output XML = file format, which is predefined.=20 This process is done using JAVA (JDK 1.3.1) with JAXP 1.1 and Crimson = Parser for Parsing the input file. We use the SAX Parser of the Crimson for implementation.=20 My files range from 4 - 40 MB. When I try to parse a file more than 1 = MB, I find that, the parser does not read part of=20 characters at some fixed places. It is happening at the same place. It = is sure that the input file has that data in the correct format. It happens only with the data and not on the tags. I = mean that it is working fine for start element and end element. It is not working for Characters alone. I would really be grateful, if you can help me in solving this problem = as it is crucial for me at this stage for my project. Thanks in advance. Gayatri Venkataraman ------=_NextPart_000_0068_01C3BB3B.D2DF73F0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> <HTML><HEAD> <META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; = charset=3Dwindows-1252"> <META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1106" name=3DGENERATOR> <STYLE></STYLE> </HEAD> <BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Hi,</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I have a very serious issue, that might = affect my=20 project as a whole. </FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>My Project involves conversion of an = Input XML file=20 to an output XML file format, which is predefined. </FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>This process is done using JAVA (JDK = 1.3.1) with=20 JAXP 1.1 and Crimson Parser for Parsing the input file. We</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>use the SAX Parser of the Crimson for=20 implementation. </FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>My files range&nbsp;from 4 - 40 MB. = When I try to=20 parse a file more than 1 MB, I find that, the parser does not = read&nbsp;part=20 of&nbsp;</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>characters at some fixed places. It is = happening at=20 the same place. It is&nbsp;sure that the input file has that data in=20 the</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>correct format. It happens only with = the data and=20 not on the tags. I mean that it is working fine for start = element</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>and end element. It is not working for = Characters=20 alone.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I would really be grateful, if you can = help me in=20 solving this problem as it is crucial for me at this stage for my=20 project.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Thanks in advance.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Gayatri = Venkataraman</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML> ------=_NextPart_000_0068_01C3BB3B.D2DF73F0-- From jeanneramirez@example.net Sat Dec 06 01:20:41 2003 Return-Path: <jeanneramirez@example.net> Delivered-To: jeanneramirez@example.net Received: (qmail 54467 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2003 01:20:41 -0000 Received: from daedalus.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 6 Dec 2003 01:20:41 -0000 Received: (qmail 60174 invoked by uid 500); 6 Dec 2003 01:20:21 -0000 Delivered-To: jeanneramirez@example.net Received: (qmail 60139 invoked by uid 500); 6 Dec 2003 01:20:21 -0000 Mailing-List: contact jeanneramirez@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: <mailto:jeanneramirez@example.net> list-unsubscribe: <mailto:jeanneramirez@example.net> list-post: <mailto:jeanneramirez@example.net> Reply-To: jeanneramirez@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list jeanneramirez@example.net Received: (qmail 60126 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2003 01:20:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail1.speakeasy.net) (83.161.120.155) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 6 Dec 2003 01:20:20 -0000 Received: (qmail 22193 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2003 01:20:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO [83.161.120.155]) ([83.161.120.155]) (envelope-sender <jeanneramirez@example.net>) by mail1.speakeasy.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with RC4-SHA encrypted SMTP for <jeanneramirez@example.net>; 6 Dec 2003 01:20:28 -0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: jeanneramirez@example.net Message-Id: <p0601020ebbf6dea71711@[83.161.120.155]> In-Reply-To: <jeanneramirez@example.net> References: <jeanneramirez@example.net> Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 20:19:08 -0500 To: jeanneramirez@example.net From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <jeanneramirez@example.net> Subject: Re: Issue with Crimson Parser Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Hi, I have a very serious issue, that might affect my project as a whole. My Project involves conversion of an Input XML file to an output XML file format, which is predefined. This process is done using JAVA (JDK 1.3.1) with JAXP 1.1 and Crimson Parser for Parsing the input file. We use the SAX Parser of the Crimson for implementation. My files range from 4 - 40 MB. When I try to parse a file more than 1 MB, I find that, the parser does not read part of characters at some fixed places. It is happening at the same place. It is sure that the input file has that data in the correct format. It happens only with the data and not on the tags. I mean that it is working fine for start element and end element. It is not working for Characters alone. 1. You need to upgrade to Xerces (but this will not fix your problem). 2. See http://www.cafeconleche.org/books/xmljava/chapters/ch06s07.html (This likely will fix your problem) In brief, when there's a large amount of text between two tags with no intervening markup, the parser may choose to call characters() multiple times even though it doesn't need to. Xerces generally won't pass more than 16K of text in one call. Crimson is limited to about 8K of text per call. At the extreme, I have even seen a parser pass a single character at a time to the characters() method. You must not assume that the parser will pass you the maximum contiguous run of text in a single call to characters(). -- Elliotte Rusty Harold jeanneramirez@example.net Effective XML (Addison-Wesley, 2003) http://www.cafeconleche.org/books/effectivexml http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN%3D0321150406/ref%3Dnosim/cafeaulaitA --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: jeanneramirez@example.net For additional commands, e-mail: jeanneramirez@example.net From jeanneramirez@example.net Sat Dec 06 12:05:57 2003 Return-Path: <jeanneramirez@example.net> Delivered-To: jeanneramirez@example.net Received: (qmail 5225 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2003 12:05:56 -0000 Received: from daedalus.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 6 Dec 2003 12:05:56 -0000 Received: (qmail 79308 invoked by uid 500); 6 Dec 2003 12:05:51 -0000 Delivered-To: jeanneramirez@example.net Received: (qmail 79272 invoked by uid 500); 6 Dec 2003 12:05:51 -0000 Mailing-List: contact jeanneramirez@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: <mailto:jeanneramirez@example.net> list-unsubscribe: <mailto:jeanneramirez@example.net> list-post: <mailto:jeanneramirez@example.net> Reply-To: jeanneramirez@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list jeanneramirez@example.net Received: (qmail 79255 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2003 12:05:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.datazug.ch) (83.161.120.155) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 6 Dec 2003 12:05:50 -0000 Received: from yahoo.de [83.161.120.155] by mail.datazug.ch with ESMTP (SMTPD32-8.04) id A61C66C0284; Sat, 06 Dec 2003 13:05:48 +0100 Message-ID: <jeanneramirez@example.net> Date: Sat, 06 Dec 2003 13:05:48 +0100 From: "J.Pietschmann" <jeanneramirez@example.net> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: jeanneramirez@example.net Subject: Re: Issue with Crimson Parser References: <jeanneramirez@example.net> <p0601020ebbf6dea71711@[83.161.120.155]> In-Reply-To: <p0601020ebbf6dea71711@[83.161.120.155]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Elliotte Rusty Harold wrote: > At the extreme, I have even seen a parser pass a single character > at a time to the characters() method. Earlier Xerces releases passed decoded character references as a single character. I think even the latest release calls characters() after a run of character references ends. Which is not unreasonable. J.Pietschmann --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: jeanneramirez@example.net For additional commands, e-mail: jeanneramirez@example.net From jeanneramirez@example.net Sat Dec 06 16:13:01 2003 Return-Path: <jeanneramirez@example.net> Delivered-To: jeanneramirez@example.net Received: (qmail 75956 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2003 16:13:01 -0000 Received: from daedalus.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 6 Dec 2003 16:13:01 -0000 Received: (qmail 14535 invoked by uid 500); 6 Dec 2003 16:12:50 -0000 Delivered-To: jeanneramirez@example.net Received: (qmail 14500 invoked by uid 500); 6 Dec 2003 16:12:50 -0000 Mailing-List: contact jeanneramirez@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: <mailto:jeanneramirez@example.net> list-unsubscribe: <mailto:jeanneramirez@example.net> list-post: <mailto:jeanneramirez@example.net> Reply-To: jeanneramirez@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list jeanneramirez@example.net Received: (qmail 14482 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2003 16:12:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx2.magma.ca) (83.161.120.155) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 6 Dec 2003 16:12:50 -0000 Received: from mail3.magma.ca (mail3.magma.ca [83.161.120.155]) by mx2.magma.ca Magma's Mail Server with ESMTP id hB6GCqAe008752 for <jeanneramirez@example.net>; Sat, 6 Dec 2003 11:12:52 -0500 Received: from jimdkwin (ottawa-hs-(544)468-3419.d-ip.magma.ca [83.161.120.155]) by mail3.magma.ca (8.12.10/8.12.9) with SMTP id hB6GCqFZ027263 for <jeanneramirez@example.net>; Sat, 6 Dec 2003 11:12:52 -0500 Message-ID: <jeanneramirez@example.net> Reply-To: "Jim Cobban" <jeanneramirez@example.net> From: "Jim Cobban" <jeanneramirez@example.net> To: <jeanneramirez@example.net> Subject: UTF-8 output invalid from org.apache.xml.serialize.XMLSerializer Date: Sat, 6 Dec 2003 11:13:46 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N When I create a Text element which contains characters which are not in the basic 128 of the first code page org.apache.xml.serialize.XMLSerializer is not converting them to valid UTF-8 escapes. What am I doing wrong? I create Text nodes in the DOM by, for example: Document doc; JTextArea textPrompt; Text newTextNode; Element descElt; ... newTextNode = doc.createTextNode(textPrompt.getText()); descElt.appendChild(newTextNode); The code to serialize the DOM is: private void saveXml(Document document) { // rename the existing layout file new File(fileName).renameTo(new File(fileName + "~")); // write the document out OutputFormat format = new OutputFormat(document); format.setIndenting(true); format.setLineWidth(0); format.setPreserveSpace(true); try { XMLSerializer serializer; serializer = new XMLSerializer ( new FileWriter(fileName), format); serializer.asDOMSerializer(); serializer.serialize(document); } catch (IOException ioe) { ... } } If I enter a character such as e' (e with acute accent) into the JTextArea and I look at the XML file using a non-UTF-8-aware editor I see that the e' has been inserted as a single byte, not as the 2 character UTF-8 escaped value. If I subsequently try to read the XML file using XERCES it blows up because of the invalid escape sequence. How do I get a valid serialization of this DOM into XML using UTF-8? Jim Cobban jeanneramirez@example.net 34 Palomino Dr. Kanata, ON, CANADA K2M 1M1 (544)468-3419 --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: jeanneramirez@example.net For additional commands, e-mail: jeanneramirez@example.net From jeanneramirez@example.net Sat Dec 06 16:40:27 2003 Return-Path: <jeanneramirez@example.net> Delivered-To: jeanneramirez@example.net Received: (qmail 82174 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2003 16:40:27 -0000 Received: from daedalus.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 6 Dec 2003 16:40:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 39432 invoked by uid 500); 6 Dec 2003 16:40:16 -0000 Delivered-To: jeanneramirez@example.net Received: (qmail 39394 invoked by uid 500); 6 Dec 2003 16:40:16 -0000 Mailing-List: contact jeanneramirez@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: <mailto:jeanneramirez@example.net> list-unsubscribe: <mailto:jeanneramirez@example.net> list-post: <mailto:jeanneramirez@example.net> Reply-To: jeanneramirez@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list jeanneramirez@example.net Received: (qmail 39381 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2003 16:40:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail6.speakeasy.net) (83.161.120.155) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 6 Dec 2003 16:40:16 -0000 Received: (qmail 13754 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2003 16:40:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO [83.161.120.155]) ([83.161.120.155]) (envelope-sender <jeanneramirez@example.net>) by mail6.speakeasy.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with RC4-SHA encrypted SMTP for <jeanneramirez@example.net>; 6 Dec 2003 16:40:18 -0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: jeanneramirez@example.net Message-Id: <p06010200bbf7b5f3ed1b@[83.161.120.155]> In-Reply-To: <jeanneramirez@example.net> References: <jeanneramirez@example.net> Date: Sat, 6 Dec 2003 11:37:35 -0500 To: jeanneramirez@example.net From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <jeanneramirez@example.net> Subject: Re: UTF-8 output invalid from org.apache.xml.serialize.XMLSerializer Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N At 11:13 AM -0500 12/6/03, Jim Cobban wrote: >If I enter a character such as e' (e with acute accent) into the JTextArea >and I look at the XML file using a non-UTF-8-aware editor I see that the e' >has been inserted as a single byte, not as the 2 character UTF-8 escaped >value. If I subsequently try to read the XML file using XERCES it blows up >because of the invalid escape sequence. > I'm certainly not sure of this, but if I had to guess I'd say it's more likely the bug is in Swing than Xerces. Can you provide a test case that demonstrates this bug without using Swing? e.g. just serializing a simple string that contains e with accent acute hard coded into the source code using a \u escape? -- Elliotte Rusty Harold jeanneramirez@example.net Effective XML (Addison-Wesley, 2003) http://www.cafeconleche.org/books/effectivexml http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN%3D0321150406/ref%3Dnosim/cafeaulaitA --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: jeanneramirez@example.net For additional commands, e-mail: jeanneramirez@example.net From jeanneramirez@example.net Sat Dec 06 17:25:07 2003 Return-Path: <jeanneramirez@example.net> Delivered-To: jeanneramirez@example.net Received: (qmail 92626 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2003 17:25:06 -0000 Received: from daedalus.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 6 Dec 2003 17:25:06 -0000 Received: (qmail 61896 invoked by uid 500); 6 Dec 2003 17:24:55 -0000 Delivered-To: jeanneramirez@example.net Received: (qmail 61852 invoked by uid 500); 6 Dec 2003 17:24:55 -0000 Mailing-List: contact jeanneramirez@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: <mailto:jeanneramirez@example.net> list-unsubscribe: <mailto:jeanneramirez@example.net> list-post: <mailto:jeanneramirez@example.net> Reply-To: jeanneramirez@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list jeanneramirez@example.net Received: (qmail 61838 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2003 17:24:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.datazug.ch) (83.161.120.155) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 6 Dec 2003 17:24:55 -0000 Received: from yahoo.de [83.161.120.155] by mail.datazug.ch with ESMTP (SMTPD32-8.04) id A0E745F0092; Sat, 06 Dec 2003 18:24:55 +0100 Message-ID: <jeanneramirez@example.net> Date: Sat, 06 Dec 2003 18:24:56 +0100 From: "J.Pietschmann" <jeanneramirez@example.net> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0;
{'source': 'Apache Software Foundation Public Mail Archives'}