Sender: |
|
X-To: |
|
Date: |
Tue, 11 Jul 2000 23:47:09 -0400 |
Reply-To: |
|
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
7bit |
In-Reply-To: |
|
Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" |
MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Very interesting ... I missed that. They did not mention that at all at the
conference (but, then again, the sessions were only 1 hour 15 minutes each),
but they did emphasize standards compliance.
That's disappointing. Have you used it enough to determine if we are
looking
at a superset of the standard or a deviation from the standard.
Rick
====================================
Richard Conn, Principal Investigator
Reuse Tapestry
-----Original Message-----
From: David Botton [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2000 10:12 PM
To: Richard Conn; [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Leveraging MicroSoft's Marketing
Sorry, but I have already written a few large applications using MSXML. and
it has many "additions" to the standard.
If you look in MSDN you will see there is a little '*' next to all the MS
specific additions in the MSXML interfaces.
David Botton
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Conn" <[log in to unmask]>
> The tune at this year's Tech-Ed 2000 conference was
> different,
> with XML 1.0, an open standard created by the World Wide Web Consortium,
was
> backed heavily, and there is no Microsoft variant this time that I can
tell.
> Even the MSDN Library entries on XML contain links to the W3C sites for
> detail.
> Built into Windows 2000, Windows CE, Windows Millenium, and what looks
like
> the
> rest of the Windows 2000 spinoffs is MSXML, a parser for W3C XML which
will
> always
> be available to any application that wants it.
>
> So, another view of the issue pertaining to Microsoft.
|
|
|