Subject: RE: [xsl] Re: Microsoft XML From: "Julian Reschke" <julian.reschke@xxxxxx> Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2001 20:46:29 +0200 |
Good summary. I'd like to add that MSXML's DOM seems to be quite conformant except for the lack of some DOM level 2 methods. > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > [mailto:owner-xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Kurt Cagle > Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 5:54 PM > To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: [xsl] Re: Microsoft XML > > > I'm not a big Microsoft fan -- I've been burned personally too > many times by > Microsoft to ever really trust them -- but I am somewhat in agreement with > Michael here. The MSXML4 parser is VERY compliant with the XML > standards ... > but only in those areas where they implement the standards at > all. They have > excellent support for XSD (through an albeit strange mechanism, > but the XSD > spec says nothing about how validation is performed), their XSLT > parsers are > very well written, and in general they've been very good about making sure > that the XML the standards they do support are current. > > MS lacks XML support in a few areas, however: > > RDF - No tool that they use works with RDF in any way. > XLink - XLink is not supported by IE or by the MSXML parser. > SMIL - They currently use HTML+TIME, though recently they announced that > they would move to a SMIL architecture in their future products. > XHTML - While IE6 can read XHTML just fine, it is still just HTML to it. > CSS - IE6 supports CSS1 to 100%, but so do Mozilla and Opera. It supports > only a few CSS2 functions, and falls far short of either Opera or > Mozilla on > this front. > SVG - Microsoft currently supports VML (although with poor documentation) > and has made no plans for an SVG add-on for IE6. My guess is they're > waiting to see what happens with the Adobe IE extension, and will > plan their > strategies from there. > DOM - The W3C XML DOM is not supported, though what I'm seeing in > .NET makes > me suspect that the final version of the .NET architecture will support > something that is syntactically close. They do have a good XML DOM, of > course, it's just not the W3C model. > MathML - No support. > > None of these (with the possible exception of XLink) are show > stoppers. As a > frequent SVG developer, I could wish for more support there, and > as someone > who frequently moves from JAXP to MS and back a consistent DOM would be a > nice to have, but I think this sets a standard for Microsoft that > few other > companies have met yet either. > > -- Kurt Cagle > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Michael Beddow" <mbnospam@xxxxxxxxxxx> > To: <xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 7:36 AM > Subject: Re: [xsl] Re: Microsoft XML > > > > On Wednesday, August 15, 2001 3:10 PM > > Mark Galbreath wrote: > > > > > Admittedly, I am new to XML/XSL; this is from Brett > > > McLaughlin's "Java and XML," (O'Reilly 2000): > > > > > > "The Microsoft parser has been intentionally left out of this list; > > > from all appearances, Microsoft does not now or in the future > > > intend to conform to W3C standards. Instead, Microsoft seems > > > to be developing their own flavor of XML. We have seen this > > > before...be careful if you are forced to use Microsoft's parser" (p. > > 24). > > > > Well, O'Reilly believes in freedom of speech and allows authors to write > > rubbish like this, provided the technical content is accurate. > > McLaughlin's book is excellent on his core topics, but like some > > denizens of this list, he seems to be a knee-jerk Microsoft hater. Hence > > this ludicrous claim. > > > > Michael > > --------------------------------------------------------- > > Michael Beddow http://www.mbeddow.net/ > > XML and the Humanities page: http://xml.lexilog.org.uk/ > > --------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list > > > > > > > XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list > XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] Re: Microsoft XML, Kurt Cagle | Thread | Re: [xsl] Re: Microsoft XML, Kurt Cagle |
Re: [xsl] good old & problem, Mike Brown | Date | RE: [xsl] Re: Microsoft XML, sara . mitchell |
Month |