xml-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Joe Polastre" <polas...@jtcsv.com>
Subject Re: [spinnaker] Announce
Date Mon, 10 Jul 2000 21:05:18 GMT
> So, let me start off another option:
> 1) we forget about spinnaker
> 2) we create a new CVS branch under xml-xerces where Xerces2 should
> reside
> 3) in case, we create a xerces2-dev mail list
> What do you think?

I agree.  I think it is a great idea.  James has good intentions, but his
method of imposing them on the group was less than noble [imho].  I think we
all have the same long term goals, and by working together, we can identify
design goals & requirements that appeal to a much larger audience rather
than just the few requirements that James has mentioned.  I feel the current
spinnaker vs. xerces method creates a dichotamy that could quite possibly
result in the same fate--one (or two) corporations performing sole
development on an open source project.

If sun and other companies & individuals are willing to invest the resources
for a xerces2 branch (and do it openly and objectively), i'm all for that

But by doing stefano's option, it creates a more 'open' arena to discuss the
pros/cons of each of the parsers out there and _jointly_ develop a design
plan for a new parser.

I'd also like to see this be coordinated with the xerces-c developers since
the source base for xerces-c is based on the original xerces-j.  it would be
nice to keep the two parsers in sync so that changes to one parser and
relatively easy to implement in the other.  plus, i haven't seen anyone
comment on the implications towards the c++ parser by starting a new branch
that could possibly become the new xerces-j.  [us C++ developers are real
people too!]

-Joe Polastre  (jpolast@apache.org)
IBM Cupertino, XML Technology Group

View raw message