Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-cocoon-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 59144 invoked from network); 18 Sep 2003 19:00:19 -0000 Received: from daedalus.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (208.185.179.12) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 18 Sep 2003 19:00:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 77034 invoked by uid 500); 18 Sep 2003 19:00:03 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-cocoon-dev-archive@cocoon.apache.org Received: (qmail 76983 invoked by uid 500); 18 Sep 2003 19:00:02 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@cocoon.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Reply-To: dev@cocoon.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@cocoon.apache.org Received: (qmail 76948 invoked from network); 18 Sep 2003 19:00:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO unet.scdi.org) (66.92.29.59) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 18 Sep 2003 19:00:02 -0000 Received: from orbeon.com (dsl092-029-136.sfo4.dsl.speakeasy.net [66.92.29.136]) (authenticated bits=0) by unet.scdi.org (8.12.3/8.12.3/Debian-6.6) with ESMTP id h8IIxuGw029679; Thu, 18 Sep 2003 11:59:56 -0700 Message-ID: <3F6A00AB.6010807@orbeon.com> Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 11:59:55 -0700 From: Erik Bruchez Organization: Orbeon, Inc. User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.5b) Gecko/20030827 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Gianugo Rabellino CC: dev@cocoon.apache.org Subject: Re: OXF rebuttal References: <001401c37cb9$26b2ec80$0100a8c0@rickie> <3F6834B8.6040308@apache.org> In-Reply-To: <3F6834B8.6040308@apache.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No X-Spam-Report: This mail is probably spam. The original message has been attached along with this report, so you can recognize or block similar unwanted mail in future. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. Content preview: Dear Gianugo, We appreciate your comments about our OXF / Cocoon comparison matrix. We have posted an update to reflect most of them: http://www.orbeon.com/oxf/cocoon [...] Content analysis details: (-1.50 points, 5 required) USER_AGENT_MOZILLA_UA (-0.5 points) User-Agent header indicates a non-spam MUA (Mozilla) IN_REP_TO (-0.5 points) Has a In-Reply-To header REFERENCES (-0.5 points) Has a valid-looking References header X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.21 (www . roaringpenguin . com / mimedefang) 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 Dear Gianugo, We appreciate your comments about our OXF / Cocoon comparison matrix. We have posted an update to reflect most of them: http://www.orbeon.com/oxf/cocoon A few additional comments below: 1. Professional Support 1. We clearly did not mean that Cocoon does not have free support. 2. The main idea we wanted to convey is that the day-to-day developers of OXF are also the people who provide professional support for OXF. It looks like we were unfair to Cocoon by not mentioning that professional support is also available for Cocoon. The matrix has been updated to reflect this better. 2. XML Validation and XPointer support In OXF, these are feature of the pipeline language itself. The validation feature is not about validation at parsing time (which is clearly supported by XML parsers) but about being able to validate each input and output of each component in a SAX pipeline with a Relax NG or W3C Schema. AFAWK this is not possible with Cocoon. The matrix has been updated to reflect this better. 3. J2EE Datasources The Cocoon documentation on the subject seems to be lacking. We have removed this item from the comparison. The lack of documentation also seems to affect J2EE authentication and JSP integration. 4. Tomcat / JSP There used to be a JSP Generator based on Tomcat's Jasper engine. Based on your comment, it looks like this way of calling JSP pages is obsolete. 5. EJB This regards the possibility to call EJBs from a pipeline without writing any Java code. The matrix has been updated to reflect this better. Regards, -Erik