xml-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From James Duncan Davidson <james.david...@eng.sun.com>
Subject Re: [spinnaker] Announce
Date Tue, 11 Jul 2000 02:51:43 GMT
on 7/10/00 6:41 PM, Arnaud Le Hors at lehors@us.ibm.com wrote:

> Sounds great! The fact is that we're also interested in a new version of
> Xerces which is more modular. As a matter of fact, we've given it quite
> some thoughts already, and Andy has even written down a first draft of a
> design document on it that we'll be happy to send out as input.

So why hasn't this been public? Why did I have to take a hammer to start a
discussion about next versions? Why are your own developers aksing "Why
should we start a new look?"

Now I'm really confused. :)

Why aim all guns at me and bash me when you've been talking internally about
a new version for a while?

> As you can see this appears to be very much in line with what James
> seems to be looking for! So, lets talk about it.

Great.. Let's do. Though I wouldn't call what I'm thinking about a pipeline

> We first need to discuss the requirements though, I'll follow up on this
> on the xerces-j list.

That's a discussion that I started. Please by all means jump in. I'd like to
see Andy's ideas. I'd like to see all of us work it together to come up with
the best possible scenario.

I do have to say that callling it Xerces2 is premature. It should just have
a code name. It shouldn't have it's own mailing list. I should just be open
on the -dev list.

.duncan


Mime
View raw message