[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]


On Wed, 18 Dec 2002 20:59:28 -0700, Uche Ogbuji 
<uche.ogbuji@f...> wrote:



> I think Microsoft is very badly discredited (at least in this forum) by 
> Mike Champion's "defense" right now, and I do suggest they publically 
> disavow such justification.

I'm quite they would not wish to be tarnished by the argument presented 
here :-)  I'm not defending MS, I'm latching onto their pragmatic 
accomodation to some real problems in XML interop to illustrate points that 
I've been trying to make on this list for years.  I find it very very 
interesting that people tend to gravitate to the same subset of XML1.x when 
they have to simultaneously optimize interoperability, 
footprint/reliability, and performance -- and that's basically the subset 
used by SOAP (all versions, AFAIK), and is awfully close to 
http://www.simonstl.com/articles/cxmlspec.txt.

 MS, of course, supports the whole spec, but from what people were saying 
earlier in this thread it looks like they make it more convenient for their 
customers to use the "Common XML Core" than the whole thing.  I find that a 
very sensible thing to do. You apparently don't. C'est la vie.


Site Map | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Trademarks
Free Stylus Studio XML Training:
W3C Member