[XSL-LIST Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: The need for a liaison implementation for Xalan to use a
Brian -- I'm no expert in this area but since no one else has answered for so long, I'll just jump in and give you my answers and let others add or subtract as they see fit. I think that most of your questions can be answered if you look at the Javadoc and source code for XercesLiaison. The liaison class is designed to provide functions that the SAX and DOM APIs do not provide by themselves but that rightly belong with the parser, at least from Xalan's point of view. For example, getParserDescription() returns a string describing the parser. There are no standards that define such a method so Xalan placed it in the liaison. If you look at the other methods listed you'll see what I mean. The methods in a liaison class are implemented with pretty small amounts of code. So, I would say, in answer to your point (1) that JAXP (and Xerces, for that matter) just don't define some of the methods that Xalan would like to have available from a parser. Remember that Xalan is using a parser implementation to create the output as well. In answer to (2) and (3), this failure is not due to the differences in the DOM level. These are functions not defined by either DOM and which are really not part of a Document Object Model but are "properties" or "methods" of the parser itself. As far as (4), Mike Kay's SAXON allows you to specify the parser you'd like to use in a ParserManager.properties file simply by specifying the name of the parser class. I think this will work with JAXP out of the box. HTH, Gary Brian Young wrote: >... > 1) Is my assumption that JAXP is meant to be the standard API between an XML parser and an XSL processor correct? How does JAXP v1.0 fail to meet this goal? > 2) Is the failure of the JAXP reference implementation to work with Xalan (without coding a liaison class) due not to the JAXP interface but rather to differences in the DOM (level 1 vs. 2)? > 3) Is the difference in the DOM the sole reason why a liaison must be used? In other words, were the next version of the JAXP reference implementation to support level 2 *or* I decided to use SAX (since both support 1.0) would it then "just work"? > 4) Are there any XSL processors out there that "just work" with the JAXP reference implementation? I know that there is a Sun XSLT compiler, and I *imagine* it uses JAXP reference, but it is not production yet. > > Insight is really appreciated. I'm learning, but not fast enough (and don't have the industry-wide view I need) to grasp this stuff as quick as I'd like to. XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|