[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
- From: David Brownell <david-b@pacbell.net>
- To: Steinar Bang <sb@metis.no>
- Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 12:00:36 -0800
Steinar Bang wrote:
>
> >>>>> David Brownell <david-b@pacbell.net>:
>
> > ... 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@ic.ac.uk
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@ic.ac.uk the following message;
unsubscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@ic.ac.uk the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@ic.ac.uk)
|
