Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Steinar Bang wrote: > > >>>>> David Brownell <david-b@p...>: > > > ... there _will_ be multiple SAX/C++ bindings. > > Well,... personally I'll follow the binding that David Megginson and > James Clark finally comes up with, no matter what it looks like > (ie. no matter whether I like everything in it or not). Lots of folk will make similar choices. I heard voices already pointing out they couldn't use a binding that didn't work on their old funky nonstandard "C++" system, for example, regardless whether it's a "blessed" API or not. That's all I meant whan I said there "_will_" be multiple bindings. SAX/Java hit a window of opportunity. SAX/C++ missed one, IMHO, so it's guaranteed plenty of competition. Bindings generated right from the Java code are not, and will not, be the only other options. - Dave p.s. No comments on the CNI binding itself? 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 unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message; unsubscribe xml-dev To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message; subscribe xml-dev-digest List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)
|
