Re: Re: [xsl] Re: Microsoft XML

[Mark Galbreath <mgalbrea@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I find your usage of written English pretty offensive....

> 
> From: "Martin Gallagher" <mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: 2001/08/15 Wed PM 05:58:24 EDT
> To: <xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [xsl] Re: Microsoft XML
> 
> I find this extremely offencsive to Microsoft, whoever wrote that section
> needs to be informed that Microsft do not plan on making their own version
> of XML, i see this almost as a racist comment against Microsoft!
> 
> We'll all see in the near future that Microsoft will conform to the
> standards at an high level.
> 
> Yours Martin Gallagher
> 
> XML @ http://www.StylishMonkey.com - The Dynamic Web Experience!
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mark Galbreath" <mgalbrea@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: <xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 3:10 PM
> Subject: [xsl] Re: Microsoft XML
> 
> 
> > 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).
> >
> > Brett McLaughlin, as you probably know, has teamed up with Jason Hunter
> ("Java Servlet Programming" (O'Reilly 2001) and James Duncan Davidson
> (author of the JAXP specification) to create JDOM (now at RC-7).
> >
> > As for my requirements, the client has a legacy SQLServer 7.0 databse.
> The idea is to permit its web content authors to change text and graphics
> through an admin interface based on XML templates that are tranformed via
> XSLT to HTML.
> >
> > Cheers!
> > Mark
> >
> > > From: "Robert Koberg" <rob@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Date: 2001/08/15 Wed AM 09:27:09 EDT
> > >
> > > MS has no way to propriatize XML. If you are saying that Oracle has one
> way
> > > to handle XML and MS has another then you would be more accurate.
> > >
> > > First, why do you need SQL server?  Are you going to store content as
> blobs
> > > or are you going to break apart the document for searches? What kind of
> > > documents? Are you sure the filesystem will not work (load the XML (or
> > > references to) at server startup)? This is often the best option
> especially
> > > for a pre-generated site.
> > >
> > > Here is a free middleware solution for XML to RDB:
> > > http://www.rpbourret.com/xmldbms/ -- this guy (Ron Bourret) also
> maintains a
> > > long list of XML DB solutions)
> > >
> > > There is also the Native XML DB option.  But your client probabaly
> already
> > > owns MS SQL...
> >
> >
> >  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