[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > BTW, is it necessary that xalan.jar contains DOM and SAX classes? Since
> > xalan depends on a parser in a separate jar,
>
> Not quite true. You can use Xalan/javax.xml.transform without ever loading
> a parser, if you are just supplying SAX2 events or DOM2 objects.
OK, good point. So to optimize for user ease of use then, both
xalan.jar and xerces.jar would include DOM and SAX classes (or at least
the L2 Core classes).
> This is somewhat of a philosophical question. If my code uses APIs, and
> those APIs are not in a system library, should my code come self-contained?
> My basic answer to this is, yes, I should be able to supply objects that
> implement or call these APIs within my application program, and not have to
> worry about loading another library that happens to implement these APIs.
So I think you are saying you prefer having a single jar file containing
both API classes and implementation classes here.
> If an xml-apis.jar existed, then I would be glad enough to require that jar
> instead.
>
> So I guess I lean towards option #3, with the stipulation that it only
> contain GA level releases of the APIs. But #1 is a fine stepping-stone
> towards this.
What do you mean by option #3? Is this the compromise of a separate jar
file for the APIs? Also, what do you mean by "GA level releases"?
I'll try and post another email to summarize this thread.
-Edwin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
In case of troubles, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
