Joseph Kesselman wrote: > > Of these, I think I like the separate JARfile solutions better than the > experimental package approach, with the "default" being the most recent > recommendation (DOM2) if one absolutely must be built into the "tool" JARs > for convenience. So are you saying you prefer the following option? + Optimize for #2 (less code duplication) + cp = dom2.jar sax2.jar jaxp.jar xerces.jar xalan.jar + cp = dom3.jar sax2.jar jaxp.jar xerces.jar xalan.jar where only dom2 contains DOM L2, jaxp.jar contains javax.xml.*, etc. -Edwin --------------------------------------------------------------------- In case of troubles, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- xml-commons XML API and API evolution Edwin Goei
- Re: xml-commons XML API and API evolution jean-guillaume . battaglia
- Re: xml-commons XML API and API evolution Shane_Curcuru
- Re: xml-commons XML API and API evolut... Edwin Goei
- xml-commons XML API and API evolution Joseph Kesselman
- Re: xml-commons XML API and API evolut... Edwin Goei
- Re: xml-commons XML API and API evolution Scott_Boag
- Re: xml-commons XML API and API evolut... Edwin Goei
- Re: xml-commons XML API and API evolution Joseph Kesselman
- Re: xml-commons XML API and API evolution Scott_Boag
- Re: xml-commons XML API and API evolut... Edwin Goei
- Re: xml-commons XML API and API evolution Joseph Kesselman
- Re: xml-commons XML API and API evolution Edwin Goei
- partial parsing of XML Andrew Anand
- Re: xml-commons XML API and API evolution Ben Coman
- Re: xml-commons XML API and API evolut... Edwin Goei