[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: [DotGNU]System.Xml

From: Simon Guindon
Subject: RE: [DotGNU]System.Xml
Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2002 14:10:57 -0500

Why not just develop a .NET compliant System.Xml and then let the world use
it and decide from there if the other 2 options are required.  It just seems
to me doing 3 or even 2 is a little over kill.

How much does MS's implementation vary from the ECMA standard?

Simon Guindon
Nureality Networks

-----Original Message-----
From: address@hidden
[mailto:address@hidden Behalf Of Rhys Weatherley
Sent: November 30, 2002 6:06 AM
To: address@hidden
Subject: [DotGNU]System.Xml

XML support has historically been a bit of a mess in pnet.
After talking with Gopal, I've identified three plans of
attack for us to take in the coming months.

First, we need an ECMA-compatible System.Xml for the 0.5.0
release.  The easiest way to do that is to the complete the
current implementation in pnetlib.  I've volunteered to be
the guinea pig on that one.

Second, we need a full-blown .NET SDK compatible version
of System.Xml.  The general consensus seems to be that our
best bet here is to reuse Mono's implementation.  I need
volunteers to identify all of the things that we need to
implement in mscorlib.dll and System.dll to support Mono's
code base.

Third, dotgnu.xml needs to be developed as an alternative
API for people who don't like System.Xml.  Probably based
around libxml2.

Thoughts?  Comments?  Flames?


Developers mailing list

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]