Lists Home |
Date Index |
- From: James Robertson <email@example.com>
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 19:28:07 +1000
At 09:46 5/10/1998 , you wrote:
| "Simon St.Laurent" wrote:
| > While it might not make sense to create the COM object, it might make
| > of sense to build supporting structures for VB, Delphi, PowerBuilder,
| > whatever other tool you like to work with.
| Wouldn't VB, Delphi, PowerBuilder etc. users use Microsoft's COM object
| parser? People do not, as an analogy, buy ".ini parsing libraries" for
| these platforms. They use thin layers over the Microsoft-provided APIs.
I think I'll jump on this, the second reference, to
Microsoft's promised COM object.
A couple of points:
* So we want XML to be tied to the great monopoly?
But, more practically:
* When is this going to be delivered?
* Will it work on NT 4/Windows 3.11/etc?
* Will it be tied to IE?
If I have to say to my customers, you need to
install IE 6 in order to use XML, then that
Shouldn't it scare you?
So far, Microsoft placed a lot of functionality
in IE, as part of it's plan to ensure market
domination for it's browser.
In any case, shouldn't we have more than
one parser available? Or do we have all
our eggs in the one basket?
And finally, unless it is already in the
IE 5 betas that are available, we will
be waiting until NT 5 (year 2000), or
IE 6 (?).
Step Two Designs Pty Ltd
SGML, XML & HTML Consultancy
"Beyond the Idea"
ACN 081 019 623
xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:email@example.com
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
To (un)subscribe, mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org the following message;
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:email@example.com the following message;
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org)