It's not the stax api per-se, it's the javax.xml.stream.* upstream
dependency, but the question is still valid.
Christian.
On 13-Apr-09, at 11:36 , Howard Lewis Ship wrote:
I chose Stax because parsing using SAX had gotten so complicated that
it was hard to add the many new features I wanted in 5.1. Anythings
possible, but I'd like to see how flexible the GAE people are in terms
of opening up the STAX API.
On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 8:11 AM, Christian Edward Gruber
<christianedwardgru...@gmail.com> wrote:
It's the stax dependency on javax.xml.stream for the moment.
Howard, any
thoughts about having an alternate template processor? It's
injected, so
would that be feasible?
Christian.
On 13-Apr-09, at 11:10 , dwi ardi irawan wrote:
wow, cool....how bout tapestry 5.1 ? any progress so far ? just
curious...
--
http://dwiardiirawan.blogspot.com
"cos everyone could be extraordinary...lighten up !"
Christian Edward Gruber
e-mail: christianedwardgru...@gmail.com
weblog: http://www.geekinasuit.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org
--
Howard M. Lewis Ship
Creator of Apache Tapestry
Director of Open Source Technology at Formos
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org
Christian Edward Gruber
e-mail: christianedwardgru...@gmail.com
weblog: http://www.geekinasuit.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org
