• From: "Klotz, Leigh" <Leigh.Klotz@x...>
• To: <elharo@m...>
• Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2009 09:27:38 -0700

Elliotte Rusty Harold wrote:
> Klotz, Leigh wrote:
> > Thank you for your prompt response.  I'm quite sure that JDOM is 
> > signalling the error, having looked at the code, the documentation, 
> > and the mailing list.
> > 
> > Here's the documentation for the Verifier method that the 
> > org.jdom.Element constructor uses:
> >   "This is a utility function for determining whether a specified 
> > character is a letter
> >    according to production 84 of the XML 1.0 specification." 
> >  
> >
http://www.jdom.org/docs/apidocs/org/jdom/Verifier.html#isXMLLetter(ch
> > ar
> > )
> 
> Now that you mention it, I may have written that code some years ago. 
> Though I think it's been optimized by others since then, the basic
gist is the same. 
> JDOM attempts to avoid potentially malformed documents.
> 
> I'm pretty sure Jason is still maintaining JDOM in what little spare
time he has, 
> but it's not his major focus. Whether you could convince him to make
the 
> change you want, I don't know. I, for one, would strongly recommend 
> against such a change. JDOM is doing you a favor by rejecting your
document. 
> Interoperable code pretends XML 1.0 5th edition never happened. 
> It is possibly the single worst spec I have ever seen come out of the 
> W3C, and has done considerable harm to the XML-using community.

I'm happy to take the advice, and I thank you all for giving it here.

JDOM is pretty mature and I've been happy with it for a couple of years
now.
But I remain worried that the JDOM mailing list is broken.  
We can't even know how many messages and bug reports were lost, and it
doesn't bode well for the future.

Leigh.

• References:
  • Whither JDOM?
    • From: "Klotz, Leigh" <Leigh.Klotz@x...>
  • RE: Whither JDOM?
    • From: "Michael Kay" <mike@s...>
  • RE: Whither JDOM?
    • From: "Klotz, Leigh" <Leigh.Klotz@x...>
  • Re: Whither JDOM?
    • From: Elliotte Harold <elharo@m...>