[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
RE: [xml-dev] SGML complexity (was: RE: [xml-dev] Re: Recognizing...)
- From: "Len Bullard" <cbullard@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "'peter murray-rust'" <pm286@xxxxxxxxx>, <xml-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2006 05:52:06 -0500
That's pretty much what I remember too. Even the MS products were free to
download. That was one of the aspects of the SGML On The Web project. It
kneecapped the overpriced software market. As I said, XML Is A Good Thing.
It would be a bad thing if the urge to push more corner features into XML
reversed that.
len
From: peter murray-rust [mailto:pm286@cam.ac.uk]
At 04:43 31/08/2006, Len Bullard wrote:
>How many of the original XML parsers were open source?
IIRC most of them - at least that source code was freely available.
The actual licence details may have been different. I can count Tim
Bray's Lark, Norbert Mikola's tool (I forget its name, but it was
seminal in developing XML) and expat and a Java equivalent from James
Clark. Murato Makoto's tools. There was a good deal of stuff from IBM
alphaworks - not sure how much of that was technically OS but it has
inspired the development of apache.xml. I made a consistent appeal
for OS on XML-DEV and I remember when (I think Fujitsu) made
something available with a phrase like "We've listened!... and now we
have released this under OS".
I can't think of many original XML parsers which were closed -
certainly none which were costs-money. But memory may play tricks.
P.
Peter Murray-Rust
Unilever Centre for Molecular Sciences Informatics
University of Cambridge,
Lensfield Road, Cambridge CB2 1EW, UK
+44-1223-763069
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]