RE: XSL rendering on IE 5

I couldn't agree more.

There is an anti Microsoft complex that can only be harmful for everybody.

I couldn't agree more with the need to control the "agressive marketing"
(inside quotes because of being such an under statement) of Microsot and 
its destructive consequences. 

But there is a lot of good stuff comming from that direction too, and 
that good stuff should be encouraged.


Let's encourage what is good and discoourage what is evil.


In the case of this list, I feel that some of the bashing is specially 
unfair. I agree that the initial IE5 version of MSXML was crap BUT:
 - You must remember when it was produced;
 - You must consider the quite impressive evolution of MSXML since 
   the start of this "Technology Preview" program.

The MSXML development team IS:
 - Making a very impressive development work. Impressive in the  
   evolution pace of both:
     - features;
     - performance;
     - stability.
 - Being quite honest about the present bugs (there is a link to 
   the bug list in the same page that presents the link to the 
   download);
 - Being honest about non-implemented features (even if not 
   promoting a lot of suicidal negative marketing on it, which no
   one does);
 - Keeping documentation with a very good level of quality, in 
   the SDK (again with a link in the same page). Especially if we 
   consider that it is a product under development.

And remember that MSXML is free.


IMHO, MSXML3 is a good thing. Why discouraging it just because it 
comes from Microsoft?

Does it make sense to discourage Microsoft both when it is beeing 
bad and when it is beeing good? 
Then it makes no difference, isn'it? Where is our (consumers) 
positive pressure then?


Have fun,

Paulo Gaspar



> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:owner-xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Dan Morrison
> Sent: Friday, July 07, 2000 13:14
> To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: XSL rendering on IE 5
> 
> 
> Apologies for any bluntness, I'm just losing patience with the
> MS-bashing I'm seeing on this list :-} . Note I started with a positive
> suggestion and am calling for tolerance, not flames or accusations.
> 
> When someone identifies a perceived or possible bug with one of the
> 'other parsers', they frame it as a polite question, which is usually
> responded to with a polite answer from one of the dev team - "yes, it
> looks like a bug" or "no, it's supposed to be that way"
> 
> Whenever someone finds that MS doesn't do exactly what they wanted,
> whether they were correct or not - it gets posted as yet another
> inflamatory "MSXML is broken" rant.
> 
> Good luck finding the 'middle path'. It's a track we Web developers have
> been steering for several years now, usually with much less acrimony.
> 
> .dan.
> 
> -- 
> :=====================:====================:
> : Dan Morrison        : The Web Limited    :
> :  http://here.is/dan :  http://web.co.nz  :
> :  dman@xxxxxxxx      :  danm@xxxxxxxxx    :
> :  04 384 1472        :  04 495 8250       :
> :  025 207 1140       :                    :
> :.....................:....................:
> : If ignorance is bliss, why aren't more people happy?
> :.........................................:
> 
> 
>  XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
> 


 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list