Re: 2.0.0 usage

Hi Michael

I understand the concerns you had with the API stability.

Out of interest though, when I was working with Jaxen, it became 
apparent that the 'model' of putting JDOM support directly in to Jaxen 
is 'broken', it should be (and now is) the other way around. JDOM 2.x 
now 'owns' the interface to Jaxen, it 'Owns' the implementation of the 
Jaxen 'Navigator'.

This solves a number of problems, not the least of which is that the 
compile-time dependencies are circular otherwise...

Is there not some way you can help build the 'glue' logic in to JDOM 
rather than in to Saxon? I started trying to do that a few months ago, 
but got my head all messed up in the API, and NodeInfo classes, etc.

 From a JDOM perspective it does not make much sense to be embedded 
inside Saxon, but it makes sense to have Saxon available as an XPath 
'engine' using the JDOM XPath API. I know that from a Saxon perspective 
there are different objectives....

Anyway, I am going to (at some point soon-ish) work on putting together 
a Soxon-based implementation of JDOM XPath API, and it would be great if 
I could work from some existing base, rather than reinvent it all...

Rolf

On 12/04/2012 3:24 PM, Michael Kay wrote:
> We were going to include JDOM 2.0 support in Saxon 9.4, tested it and it
> was fine, but then we realised the API wasn't stable enough and pulled
> it before release. It will no doubt go back in for 9.5.
>
> Having said that, we don't actually "use" JDOM, except to run tests.
>
> Michael Kay
> Saxonica
>

_______________________________________________
To control your jdom-interest membership:
http://www.jdom.org/mailman/options/jdom-interest/[email protected]