Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-tomcat-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 2036 invoked from network); 12 Jan 2010 08:58:18 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 12 Jan 2010 08:58:18 -0000 Received: (qmail 60799 invoked by uid 500); 12 Jan 2010 08:58:17 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-tomcat-dev-archive@tomcat.apache.org Received: (qmail 60714 invoked by uid 500); 12 Jan 2010 08:58:16 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@tomcat.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: "Tomcat Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list dev@tomcat.apache.org Received: (qmail 60702 invoked by uid 99); 12 Jan 2010 08:58:16 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 12 Jan 2010 08:58:16 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.2 required=10.0 tests=SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [193.252.22.151] (HELO smtp6.freeserve.com) (193.252.22.151) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 12 Jan 2010 08:58:08 +0000 Received: from me-wanadoo.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mwinf3506.me.freeserve.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 1F13A7000085 for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2010 09:57:47 +0100 (CET) Received: from me-wanadoo.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mwinf3506.me.freeserve.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 1333D7000087 for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2010 09:57:47 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail.homeinbox.net (unknown [91.109.129.181]) by mwinf3506.me.freeserve.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id D77B07000085 for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2010 09:57:46 +0100 (CET) X-ME-UUID: 20100112085746882.D77B07000085@mwinf3506.me.freeserve.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.homeinbox.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id F001E32638 for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2010 08:58:54 +0000 (GMT) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at homeinbox.net Received: from mail.homeinbox.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.homeinbox.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YYpA8vgQdbwj for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2010 08:58:51 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [192.168.0.9] (study03.dev.local [192.168.0.9]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.homeinbox.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 53F9D3262F for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2010 08:58:51 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: <4B4C3984.4000108@apache.org> Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2010 08:57:40 +0000 From: Mark Thomas User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.2; en-GB; rv:1.9.1.5) Gecko/20091204 Thunderbird/3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tomcat Developers List Subject: Re: svn commit: r898126 - /tomcat/trunk/java/org/apache/jasper/compiler/JspDocumentParser.java References: <20100112001047.0C9722388901@eris.apache.org> <427155181001111745s57cbceb6x819b861266a9b01d@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <427155181001111745s57cbceb6x819b861266a9b01d@mail.gmail.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 12/01/2010 01:45, Konstantin Kolinko wrote: > 2010/1/12 : >> Author: markt >> Date: Tue Jan 12 00:10:46 2010 >> New Revision: 898126 >> >> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=898126&view=rev >> Log: >> Fix https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47977 >> Using a body with tags specified to have empty body content should cause an error >> >> Modified: >> tomcat/trunk/java/org/apache/jasper/compiler/JspDocumentParser.java >> > >> @@ -426,9 +430,10 @@ >> if (scriptlessBodyNode == null >> && bodyType.equalsIgnoreCase(TagInfo.BODY_CONTENT_SCRIPTLESS)) { >> scriptlessBodyNode = node; >> - } >> - else if (TagInfo.BODY_CONTENT_TAG_DEPENDENT.equalsIgnoreCase(bodyType)) { >> + } else if (TagInfo.BODY_CONTENT_TAG_DEPENDENT.equalsIgnoreCase(bodyType)) { >> tagDependentPending = true; >> + } else if (TagInfo.BODY_CONTENT_EMPTY.equals(bodyType)) { >> + tagEmptyBody = node; >> } >> } >> } > > Why there is equalsIgnoreCase() in the old code? Did the specification > ever allow wrong-cased values there? If yes, then maybe the added > clause should also use equalsIgnoreCase. The spec consistently uses the same case for all possible values of . Since XML is case sensitive one could argue it should always be "empty" in this case. That said, I think being lenient here is the pragmatic thing to do so I'll make the check case-insensitive. Mark --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tomcat.apache.org