Jeremias Maerki <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote on 12/19/2008 02:21:31 AM:
> Hi Michael,
> basically you might see familiar names again, like me. ;-) See my
> initial response to Jukka's proposal on Apache Commons:
> Anyway, I don't think we can get high hopes that this will result in a
> package with high contribution level. XML Commons would not suddenly
> start to buzz with activity (I could be wrong). After all this will we a
> consolidation of useful tools written elsewhere with hopefully some
> discussions to improve them by sharing ideas. But it could actually
> attract some attention which would be a good thing. I'm regularly
> writing SAX-based code (parsing and generating) so I'm really interested
> in this.
It could also help if the XML Commons website got some TLC. To someone browsing the front page of it may look like the project is dead, with stale information about things which happened in 2002(?) and news about ApacheCon US 2005. Was hoping this would all get renovated and relocated under xerces.apache.org but even our TLP site still needs a lot of work. We had discussed moving the Xerces websites over to Forrest  awhile back but doesn't look like the ball ever got rolling. I'd still like to see that happen.
> As you've seen with XML Commons Externals, XML Graphics proposed to add
> some additional XML APIs but after that not much happened. Still, that
> part is a very important part for XML Graphics as it means we have a
> good place for those and we still depend on them. I don't think it's
> necessarily a bad sign if not much happens. The resolver is a widely
> adopted tool. It seems to be good enough not to attract more developers.
I understand. It's hard to attract folks to components which are basically complete. That's been one of the challenges for Xerces-J. I suspect most folks are generally happy with what they're getting (e.g. the core XML scanner is getting to the point where it is or is almost bug free) though it's gotten better for attracting developers as we've started working on new things like XML Schema 1.1 and StAX.
> I don't expect an XML Commons SAX to be much different once it's
> established. At least, since it's not a single component but a
> collection of utilities, it will have a better chance to get regular
> attention even if probably at a relatively low rate.
> The only strange thing is that I didn't make the connection to XML
> Commons when Jukka posted the proposal on Apache Commons. Still
> wondering about that. ;-)
XML Parser Development
IBM Toronto Lab