In Java database connectivity (JDBC) terminology, is the Type 1 driver correctly described as the JDBC–ODBC bridge driver? Provide the most accurate judgment about this statement, considering typical usage and deprecation history.

Introduction / Context:
This question checks core knowledge of JDBC driver classifications. Understanding the four historical JDBC driver types is essential when maintaining legacy code, analyzing performance, or planning migrations away from deprecated components.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• The statement claims: “JDBC Type 1 drivers are JDBC–ODBC bridge drivers.”
• We assess the claim against the canonical JDBC taxonomy (Types 1–4).
• Environment specifics (OS, DBMS vendor, Java version) do not change the formal definition of driver types.

Concept / Approach:
JDBC drivers were historically grouped as follows: Type 1 (JDBC–ODBC bridge), Type 2 (native-API partly Java), Type 3 (net-protocol, middleware), and Type 4 (pure Java, database-protocol). Type 1 relies on an ODBC driver on the client and acts as a bridge from JDBC calls to ODBC calls.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:
Cross-check any JDBC summary table: Type 1 is always listed as the JDBC–ODBC bridge. Even though deprecated/removed, legacy docs uniformly agree on this mapping.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

• “Invalid (Type 1 is pure Java thin)”: Pure Java thin is Type 4, not Type 1.
• “Depends on vendor / OS / Java 11+” does not alter the driver type definitions.

Common Pitfalls:
Confusing Type 1 (bridge) with Type 4 (thin); assuming deprecation changes the definition rather than support status.

Final Answer:
Valid (Type 1 is the JDBC–ODBC bridge driver)