Lists Home |
Date Index |
On Thu, 12 Sep 2002, Elliotte Rusty Harold wrote:
> Perhaps. I did notice your announcements on FreshMeat this morning,
> but I didn't look at them too closely, because as you'll hear on the
> 17th, one of my design principles is that non-open source XML APIs
> die, completely irrespective of whether or not the technology is any
> good. What you have may be a significant leap forward in processing
> XML, but as long as it's closed, it's irrelevant. If you want people
> to pay attention to new ideas in the XML world, open is the only way
> to go.
there's only a mention on the site that the spec is 'open', however i've
not stamped an applicable open-source licence on it yet. maybe i should,
to avoid further confusion.
what i'm hoping for is that people will use the ObjectBox to try out the
language itself and see the benefits thereof. Then the road lies open for
any number of opensource implementations (to which i'd certainly
contribute myself). Furthermore, if there is enough interest from the XML
community, I'd be more than happy to put the language spec in the hands of
a reliable standardisation organisation.
The ObjectBox is only a convenient way of running and developing o:XML
programs, and will in the future be a powerful web services and XML
component framework. There is nothing stopping anyone from using the
ObjectBox to develop programs, then (with a nifty XSL stylesheet) turn
those programs into a-n-other language to compile and run independently.
The software licence for the ObjectBox does not restrict this sort of use
in any way.
hope this helps, kind regards