Stefan Bodewig wrote: > > On Tue, 30 Oct 2001, Edwin Goei <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I'm not sure I agree, I'd argue to not use xml-apis.jar. For one > > thing, it may make it more difficult to debug problems b/c a failure > > may occur b/c of code in a particular version of xml-apis.jar or in > > the implementation jar file. > > This is why I asked for a released version of that JAR. That way we > could always say Ant release X.Y contains xml-apis.jar version U.V. > If there is no released version, I'd probably veto adding an arbitrary > snapshot to Ant distributions.
As far as I know there never has been a release of xml-apis.jar from xml-commons. I have only been using that module just as a repository for common source code and that source code was copied to various subprojects. The source code gets built in each subproject to create a single project jar file as I described. I personally do not think having an xml-apis.jar file is such a good idea so I'm not the right person to ask to create such a distribution. However, if someone else wants to do this, I won't stop them. I think there are problems with this as I stated in a previous email. > > > For example, Xerces plans to implement drafts of DOM L3 so they may > > need a version of xml-apis.jar that contains those classes. > > Break that JAR into several JARs? I believe that would create more of a problem because there would be more jar files and since you can potentially have dom3.jar and a different version of dom3.jar as changes are made to DOM L3, for example. With a single project.jar you can be sure that the DOM L3 and SAX classes packaged within it are all consistent with the implementation. > > > For crimson, here is the way I think it should work... There should > > be only a single jar file: crimson.jar that contains everything: > > both implementation and API classes. > > I've done so for Ant's CVS version, that is what made Stephane start > the thread 8-) - prior to that we had Crimson 1.1.1 and the > corresponding jaxp.jar. Stephane wants to add xml-apis.jar to get the > transformation part of JAXP as well (the interfaces only, so that we > can compile the optional parts of Ant that depend on TraX). If I understand you correctly, you want to compile code that only depends on trax. If you are using Xalan, the trax portions of JAXP are included in xalan.jar. So perhaps one way to achieve this is to have xalan.jar on your classpath when you build the optional parts of Ant. Of course you can always copy the trax source from xml-commons, but that might not correspond to a particular version. There is a tag for the jaxp-ri-1_1_3 version of trax, though. Would any of the options above work for you? > > > I noticed that Ant uses an older version of crimson that has > > jaxp.jar. > > This has been the latest release of crimson when Ant 1.4 has been > released and I think Conor simply missed the 1.1.3 release of > Crimson. Ant's CVS has been updated. OK, good. -Edwin --------------------------------------------------------------------- In case of troubles, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
