On 1/24/07, Nic James Ferrier <nferrier(_at_)tapsellferrier(_dot_)co(_dot_)uk>
wrote:
Whereas everytime I use saxon I have to spend 10 minutes working it
all out.
really? (try laying off the booze in between :-)
It's not that. The documentation isn't great and it doesn't try very
hard to do the right thing.
What's the right thing? The Saxon documentation is fantastic. Not
only that, the error messages are by far the best around (for example
compare the validation messages between the XML schema processors in
Saxon and Xerces...) It's one feature of Saxon that doesn't get
mentioned that often, but the helpful error messages really decrease
development time. If I ever have a problem, I always switch to using
Saxon to work through it.
For example, you should be able to run saxon just with a jar, eg:
java -jar saxon.jar my.xslt myinput.xml
but the last time I tried it wasn't possible.
If you are creating java apps then you should be enjoying the jaxp
interfaces :) But if you did want to run it from the command line
then you can do just that - who knows why it didn't work for you then,
as you've just said "it wasn't possible".
This is really really strange that two java programmers cite classpath
problems as a reason for not using Saxon, and in turn not using XSLT
2.0.
Up to you I suppose, it really isn't anything like you make it sound.
--~------------------------------------------------------------------
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
To unsubscribe, go to: http://lists.mulberrytech.com/xsl-list/
or e-mail: <mailto:xsl-list-unsubscribe(_at_)lists(_dot_)mulberrytech(_dot_)com>
--~--