Re: XML idea

[Alex Perez]

On Jan 8, 2004, at 3:13 AM, Fred Kiefer wrote:

> Fabien VALLON wrote:
> > It would be nice if the PortabilityKit team finished some of the 
> > classes
> > that are semi-portable between GNUstep and Cocoa (such as the
> > NSDocument architecture, for example). Do the PortabilityKit team 
> > plan to submit fixes for classes already in
> > GNUstep?
>
> Could you please explain a bit on this? A big junk of the document 
> structure is already in
Chunk? :)
>  GNUsteo GUI and has been usefull for years. At least to the degree 
> which Ink needed. The new bits that are missing, should be added 
> inplace. This is also a good example to see, that some Cocoa 
> extensions cannot be done in a separate library. For example, changes 
> in NSApplication where needed to support document handling.
I personally believe NSDocument should stay in GNUstep itself. But I 
wouldn't care if it got moved to PortabilityKit either. I am purely 
indifferent. From my perspective, the more stuff in GNUstep, the less I 
have to maintain :)
> I really would prefer to have the additional Cocoa classes in GUI and 
> have a compiler switch to not include them. That way we could also 
> remove the small bits needed in other classes to support them. But as 
> I said, the bigger problem I see in in the writing of the code. We did 
> not trund down the offer of any new class during the last year, as 
> there was none.
One of the MAJOR reasons nobody from macland has contributed anything 
is because of the percieved hostlity of many GNUsteppers towards 
anything Apple. There are some great examples of this happening here 
within just the last few days. NSXMLParser comes to mind.

Alex Perez
aperez@student.santarosa.edu
"Error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat 
it."
--Thomas Jefferson