Brian Jones wrote:
> Maksim Lin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > BTW, I'm not sure that providing a plug-in replacement is a particularly
> > good idea (though I wouldn't complain if someone did it) since it would
> > take huge resources and swing isn't particaulrly brillant anyway (nice
> > yes - great no). Having a "light" replacement such as the dogui tk would
> > probably be just as good an alternative, with people developing other
> > widgets as needed - thouhg a decent architecture would be needed, swing
> > has very flexible architecture and perhaps suffers a bit for it.
>
> javax.swing is part of the core library set as of 1.2, or Java 2,
> however you'd like to say it. The end result is we have to implement
> it and we will.
I thought that the whole point of the "javax" prefix was to denote things
that weren't standardized as part of the core library set -- java eXtensions.
xtoph
