Subject: Re: Re: [xsl] Re: Microsoft XML From: Mark Galbreath <mgalbrea@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2001 19:34:07 EDT |
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
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] Re: Microsoft XML, Kurt Cagle | Thread | RE: [xsl] Re: Microsoft XML, Elliotte Rusty Harol |
RE: [xsl] Re: Microsoft XML, Max Dunn | Date | [xsl] data extraction from an xml/s, Sunil Dua |
Month |