Hi Jeff,
>Okay, this was how it looked to me last time I investigated:
>
>Perl, Python, PHP all use the same xml parser -- expat, a
>non-validating SAX parser. That, or they offer other
>non-validating native implementations.
>
>Java has JAXP, the interchangable parser, numerous validating
>parsers (both SAX and DOM), strong XML support from IBM, and
>more.
>
>So when I say "comparatively thin", I mean thin compared to
>Java.
In that sense then the list becomes Java, C++, Delphi, Progress all
having the full blown parsers. Some of these are even getting a
jump on some of the critical "new" standards layered on top of XML
such as XSLT, XPath, X yada-yada-yada. :-)
Yes, the others lack the validating portion which can be significant
in full XML support.
As a basic text based data format though even the "thin"
options provide usable support. Support which those tools
don't have for native REBOL output.
I'm not ignoring the points Carl made earlier about the
"semantic" problem being deeper than what XML is easily
handling. Given time, proper product positioning, and some
of that "standardized" way of interacting, REBOL could beat
XML to a viable, distributed solution.
In the mean time :-) REBOL needs to work very well with the
technologies that are already in place. One such area is XML
as a "descriptive" data format, HTML as presentation markup,
rdbm systems for storage, internet protocols, ...
As you can see - RT is doing an excellent job on most of these
fronts, and I expect it will only get better.
Though REBOL needs a killer app or two to get people aware
of it as a name and a technology that creates valuable solutions!
FWIW, Rod.
Rod Gaither
Oak Ridge, NC - USA
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
To unsubscribe from this list, please send an email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" in the
subject, without the quotes.
