[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

RE: MSXML for Java Questions

• From: "Erik James Freed" <ejfreed@i...>
• To: "David Brownell" <david-b@p...>, <xml-dev@i...>
• Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 10:01:48 -0700

Good points Dave. I used to be very happy with MS for being so aggressive
with XML and XSL
with their IE5 product. I was naive enough to not think through the rather
obvious fact that once it was out, there was not a lot of pressure to
keep up. The phrase 'de facto' is the operative one. Our company just
ignores
the capabilities of IE5 and since we use a downloaded activex java control,
we just load in a stripped down version of xml and xsl. While this ends up
making
our plugin larger, we have the advantage of identical server and browser
processing,
as well as portability across browsers.

I also kind of like the idea of just ignoring IE5 XML/XSL until they get
their act together.

erik

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-xml-dev@i... [mailto:owner-xml-dev@i...]On Behalf Of
David Brownell
Sent: Thursday, September 09, 1999 9:29 AM
To: xml-dev@i...
Subject: Re: MSXML for Java Questions


Erik James Freed wrote:
>
> The other problem is that there are those who believe that this product is
> far from production worthy, and it is definitely far behind other
> XML/XSL products in keeping up with current releases of standards. To make
> matters even worse, both companies refuse to make a
> public statement in regards to any of these issues and their intentions.

Depends what you mean by "public statement".  I count leaving
major bugs as unfixed to be significant statements.  Microsoft
bundling the rather ancient MSXML into their latest version of
a Java VM _without bugfixes_ is yet another sort of statement.
(About standards and perhaps DataChannel.)


> This means that server XML/XSL and client XML/XSL de facto standards are
now
> divergent. It remains to be seen what MS and or
> datachannel have up their sleeve, but right now it is kind of bleak for
> those like our company that would benefit a lot from identical
> server and client standards for XML and XSL (T)

I'd put it differently:  the XML/XSL standards are pretty clear,
but what's lacking is browser support, and there's no announced
path whereby Microsoft's browsers will conform.  There may yet
be such a path -- but folk have been asking for conformance for
some time, and not seeing it.

- Dave

xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i...
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN
981-02-3594-1
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following
message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)



xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i...
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: MSXML for Java Questions
    • From: David Brownell <david-b@p...>

• References:
  • Re: MSXML for Java Questions
    • From: David Brownell <david-b@p...>

• Prev by Date: Re: ANN: XML and Databases article
• Next by Date: Re: RFP: Namespace URI for HTML
• Previous by thread: Re: MSXML for Java Questions
• Next by thread: Re: MSXML for Java Questions
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread