Thanks Kohsuke - that explanation makes sense, and yes, I dare say
you're right and that someone along the line has shipped an invalid
QName class.
cheers
dim
On 3/23/06, Kohsuke Kawaguchi <Kohsuke.Kawaguchi_at_sun.com> wrote:
> Dmitri Colebatch wrote:
> > Can I ask what may be a stupid question here. If QName is now bundled
> > with 1.5, and JAXB requires 1.5, then why is JAXB shipping QName?
> > There seems to be no more logic to that than JAXB shipping its own
> > version of java.lang.StringBuilder. This same argument goes for
> > IntelliJ shipping with QName in their classpath (given that it also
> > requires 1.5).
>
> JAXB has to ship JSR-173 API jar, as we depends on it. JSR-173 API jar,
> in turn, thought it needs to ship QName, because it can run on earlier
> JDKs that doesn't ship with QName.
>
> But if you put them together, you get this non-sense.
>
> I'll check if we can remove QName from StAX jar, but JCP has
> compatibility rules that prevent people from modifying those code, so
> I'm not too surprised if it's not allowed.
>
> --
> Kohsuke Kawaguchi
> Sun Microsystems kohsuke.kawaguchi_at_sun.com
>
>
>