Re: reliability of MSXML

On Thu, Nov 08, 2001 at 03:58:33PM +0000, Trevor Nash wrote:
> Daniel Veillard wrote:
> 
> >  It's not too late to *at least* emit a warning when the
> >conversion occurs. Coming from a Working Group member this reflects
> >badly, no ? Why should others take the pain of fixing their bugs
> >when you don't.
> A little strong, I think.  David already pointed out that the 1.1

  Okay, I apologize to Mike for the harsh wording. But you know,
it's very frustrating to hear from "would have been" users that
"oh finally we used somthing else because it didn't worked" and
learning after the fact that this was due to stylesheets which
had been developped with Saxon, like a lot of people do because
it usually gives good error reporting, and that this precise bug
on someone else software blocked adoption of yours.
  Most people don't report bugs, they just try another tool until
they think that it works... No way to catch the problem. I was actually
tempted to "force" the same bug just to avoid this problem... I
didn't so far.

Daniel

-- 
Daniel Veillard      | Red Hat Network http://redhat.com/products/network/
veillard@xxxxxxxxxx  | libxml Gnome XML XSLT toolkit  http://xmlsoft.org/
http://veillard.com/ | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/

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