xml-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Scott_B...@lotus.com
Subject Re: xml-commons XML API and API evolution
Date Tue, 21 Aug 2001 17:46:15 GMT

> What do you mean by option #3?  Is this the compromise of a separate jar
> file for the APIs?

Yes, -->

>   + Compromise, seems to be maybe what xml-apis.jar was for
>    + cp = xml-apis.jar xerces.jar xalan.jar
>      where only xml-apis.jar contains javax.xml, DOM, SAX

I don't love it, but it seems to me that these APIs are indeed general, and
might ought to have their own jar file.

On the other hand, "+ Optimize for #1" is probably a better short term
solution, in that they will cause less user turmoil.

-scott




                                                                                         
                         
                    Edwin Goei                                                           
                         
                    <edwingo@sun.c       To:     general@xml.apache.org               
                            
                    om>                  cc:     (bcc: Scott Boag/CAM/Lotus)          
                            
                                         Subject:     Re: xml-commons XML API and API evolution
                   
                    08/20/2001                                                           
                         
                    09:23 PM                                                             
                         
                    Please respond                                                       
                         
                    to general                                                           
                         
                                                                                         
                         
                                                                                         
                         




Scott_Boag@lotus.com wrote:
>
> > BTW, is it necessary that xalan.jar contains DOM and SAX classes?
Since
> > xalan depends on a parser in a separate jar,
>
> Not quite true.  You can use Xalan/javax.xml.transform without ever
loading
> a parser, if you are just supplying SAX2 events or DOM2 objects.

OK, good point.  So to optimize for user ease of use then, both
xalan.jar and xerces.jar would include DOM and SAX classes (or at least
the L2 Core classes).

> This is somewhat of a philosophical question.  If my code uses APIs, and
> those APIs are not in a system library, should my code come
self-contained?
> My basic answer to this is, yes, I should be able to supply objects that
> implement or call these APIs within my application program, and not have
to
> worry about loading another library that happens to implement these APIs.

So I think you are saying you prefer having a single jar file containing
both API classes and implementation classes here.

> If an xml-apis.jar existed, then I would be glad enough to require that
jar
> instead.
>
> So I guess I lean towards option #3, with the stipulation that it only
> contain GA level releases of the APIs.  But #1 is a fine stepping-stone
> towards this.

What do you mean by option #3?  Is this the compromise of a separate jar
file for the APIs?  Also, what do you mean by "GA level releases"?

I'll try and post another email to summarize this thread.

-Edwin

---------------------------------------------------------------------
In case of troubles, e-mail:     webmaster@xml.apache.org
To unsubscribe, e-mail:          general-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xml.apache.org






---------------------------------------------------------------------
In case of troubles, e-mail:     webmaster@xml.apache.org
To unsubscribe, e-mail:          general-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xml.apache.org


Mime
View raw message