Re: [xml-dev] better (?) than DOM

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index]

From: Manos Batsis <manos_lists@geekologue.com>
To: Robin Berjon <robin@joost.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 03:57:53 -0800

Quoting Robin Berjon <robin@joost.com>:
> It seems to be begging for E4X, which is IMHO a lot
> clearer than the above.

As said in my original email (sent only to Nathan by accident),
interoperability is, again, the problem :-/


Manos

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [xml-dev] better (?) than DOM
  - From: Robin Berjon <robin@joost.com>

References:
- better (?) than DOM
  - From: "Nathan Young -X \(natyoung - Artizen at Cisco\)" <natyoung@cisco.com>
- RE: [xml-dev] better (?) than DOM
  - From: "Nathan Young -X \(natyoung - Artizen at Cisco\)" <natyoung@cisco.com>
- Re: [xml-dev] better (?) than DOM
  - From: Robin Berjon <robin@joost.com>

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index]