You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@tomcat.apache.org by Jon Stevens <jo...@latchkey.com> on 2001/01/04 07:42:00 UTC
Re: Why are we still using JAXP and ProjectX???
(proprietary==evil)
on 1/3/2001 10:24 PM, "Kevin A. Burton" <bu...@relativity.yi.org> wrote:
> Ug.
>
> Checked over the archives and didn't see this
>
> Why are we using JAXP and ProjectX which are both Closed Source and
> proprietary
> to SUN Microsystems. This is a Bad Thing. We already have an awesome XML
> parser and I would say just *drop* the abstraction... not worth the loss of
> Freedom :(.
JAXP itself is just a parser API that the parser implements. Nothing big
about that. I wouldn't fret it. It is also under the JCP so that is
supposedly somewhat OSS in that if you bitch loudly enough to enough people,
you will get let in. Well maybe.
> This came up because I am having problems with ProjectX..
Actually, Tomcat 4.x is using Crimson as its parser by default. It is OSS.
Maybe you should use that instead.
<http://xml.apache.org/websrc/cvsweb.cgi/xml-contrib/crimson/>
p.s. Kevin, it is nice to see that you have finally stopping the PGP signing
of your messages, that was so annoying, however now your .sig has about 10
lines of additional crap at the bottom. Maybe you could compress it a bit.
:-)
-jon
Re: Why are we still using JAXP and ProjectX??? (proprietary==evil)
Posted by "Kevin A. Burton" <bu...@relativity.yi.org>.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Jon Stevens <jo...@latchkey.com> writes:
> on 1/3/2001 10:24 PM, "Kevin A. Burton" <bu...@relativity.yi.org> wrote:
>
> > Ug.
> >
> > Checked over the archives and didn't see this
> >
> > Why are we using JAXP and ProjectX which are both Closed Source and
> > proprietary
> > to SUN Microsystems. This is a Bad Thing. We already have an awesome XML
> > parser and I would say just *drop* the abstraction... not worth the loss of
> > Freedom :(.
>
> JAXP itself is just a parser API that the parser implements. Nothing big
> about that. I wouldn't fret it. It is also under the JCP so that is
> supposedly somewhat OSS in that if you bitch loudly enough to enough people,
> you will get let in. Well maybe.
It is not even close. Man... must be great being in the JCP and having all your
intellectual property become SUNs :)
> > This came up because I am having problems with ProjectX..
>
> Actually, Tomcat 4.x is using Crimson as its parser by default. It is OSS.
> Maybe you should use that instead.
>
> <http://xml.apache.org/websrc/cvsweb.cgi/xml-contrib/crimson/>
Ah.. cool. good to see.
> p.s. Kevin, it is nice to see that you have finally stopping the PGP signing
> of your messages, that was so annoying, however now your .sig has about 10
> lines of additional crap at the bottom. Maybe you could compress it a bit.
> :-)
no... just toggled it for a second. :) Jon. If you used a *decent* e-mail
client you wouldn't even see the PGP data :). Time to stop using a Microsoft
product and upgrade to gnus :)
Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.02.2022
Kevin
- --
Kevin A. Burton ( burton@apache.org, burton@openprivacy.org, burtonator@acm.org )
Cell: 408-910-6145 URL: http://relativity.yi.org ICQ: 73488596
Intellectual property does not exist! Get over it!
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Get my public key at: http://relativity.yi.org/pgpkey.txt
iD8DBQE6WnzbAwM6xb2dfE0RAlIkAKCy8JksWIPIrMZM2C2qoFfv5m/YDwCfWe1T
dJSocbBlhquiU2vGXRjAArA=
=kBVb
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Mossad ammunition SDI security radar munitions PLO FSF explosion DES AK-47
Clinton Kennedy World Trade Center KGB
Re: Why are we still using JAXP and ProjectX??? (proprietary==evil)
Posted by Rajiv Mordani <Ra...@eng.sun.com>.
--
:wq
On Wed, 3 Jan 2001, Jon Stevens wrote:
> on 1/3/2001 10:24 PM, "Kevin A. Burton" <bu...@relativity.yi.org> wrote:
>
> > Ug.
> >
> > Checked over the archives and didn't see this
> >
> > Why are we using JAXP and ProjectX which are both Closed Source and
> > proprietary
> > to SUN Microsystems. This is a Bad Thing. We already have an awesome XML
> > parser and I would say just *drop* the abstraction... not worth the loss of
> > Freedom :(.
>
> JAXP itself is just a parser API that the parser implements. Nothing big
> about that. I wouldn't fret it. It is also under the JCP so that is
> supposedly somewhat OSS in that if you bitch loudly enough to enough people,
> you will get let in. Well maybe.
>
> > This came up because I am having problems with ProjectX..
>
> Actually, Tomcat 4.x is using Crimson as its parser by default. It is OSS.
> Maybe you should use that instead.
>
> <http://xml.apache.org/websrc/cvsweb.cgi/xml-contrib/crimson/>
The latest version of the parser is infact
http://xml.apache.org/websrc/cvsweb.cgi/xml-crimson.
It's been moved from the contrib area..
- Rajiv
>
>
> p.s. Kevin, it is nice to see that you have finally stopping the PGP signing
> of your messages, that was so annoying, however now your .sig has about 10
> lines of additional crap at the bottom. Maybe you could compress it a bit.
> :-)
>
> -jon
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: tomcat-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, email: tomcat-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>