On Sat, 2005-09-03 at 21:56 +0100, Chris Burdess wrote: > If you want me to make everything jsr173-compliant instead I can do > that, but then aren't we going to get back into a ridiculous licensing > situation with BEA? There's no way to retrieve the jsr173 specification > without agreeing to the BEA clickthrough.
I think this points at jsr173 docs without the clickthrough: https://stax-utils.dev.java.net/nonav/javadoc/api/javax/xml/stream/XMLEventReader.html > Note that I will include an implementation RSN, if that's your main > issue wrt the woodstox code. Oh, even better! I'll just sit tight then. Thanks! AG _______________________________________________ Classpath-patches mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath-patches
