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
