Shane Curcuru wrote: > > ---- "Gary L Peskin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ---- > > Have a look at http://java.sun.com/xml/jaxp/faq.html#pluggability. > > I don't know whether to laugh or cry. Here's the first time that I've > ever seen an official bit of Sun documentation address this issue at > all - Good. But reading it, note the Bad phrase they use: > > "For example, updating Java 2 SDK 1.4 with a > newer version of Xalan may not be as simple, unless the > TransformFactory subclass uses a different name from the > bundled version within Java 2 SDK 1.4. There is an Endorsed Standards > mechanism > that may work in this case."
Sorry, I'm responsible for that quote. I maintain a single JAXP FAQ document that gets turned into an Unofficial one at http://xml.apache.org/~edwingo/jaxp-faq.html and the official one that you quote. (Using XSLT, BTW :-)) I consider the unofficial version to be the better one, but Sun also wanted an official one which I agreed to do. > Which basically means we 'may' be able to rev newer Xalan versions, but > I wouldn't count on it being easy. See my previous posts on the subject. > It would also be nice if Sun coordinated or at least informed the Xalan > community on when they're planning to take a code snapshot, but I > haven't seen that happening lately in any official or semi-official way. I thought this happened back when Costin was working at Sun. This was around the D10 timeframe. In any case, thanks for pointing this out in the FAQ. I'll have to update it. -Edwin
