From: Sergey V. U. <ser...@cl...> - 2001-07-30 22:38:52
|
> sure, but that doesn't make SAX "non-standard". Sure. I just had objections for old SAX without JAXP. > i misspoke. i should have said that Crimson does support all of JAXP, > but even that doesn't really matter, since the missing part is the > javax.xml.transform package. True. xalan is still not ready for this package:( > i didn't know Slava had an intention to move anything to XSL. i > mentioned building the documentation with XSL a few days ago, but i That's what I meant. So InfoViewer could use XSL ... > don't think that jEdit can use XSL to much benefit. > i would say that with more internal resources moving to XML in the next > jEdit version, it wouldn't be a bad idea to ditch MicroStar for a better > parser. most likely, Crimson is the best fit. Thanks for this statement. At least now I see the light... OK, for a moment if a plugin would require crimson.jar and jaxp.jar - would it be OK or not? Or - I have to use SAX 1.0/MicroStar for any XML processing?:( Regards, Sergey |