XML/Xerces and TCL
J.M. Ivler
the TCL community (Steve, Jeffrey, Alexandre, whomever is the person that
John hired to be the XML guy at Scriptics and even you Cameron) was
aware of anyone who was working with xml.apache.org to get TCL into the
Xerces project (which today is Java, C++ and Perl).
Yes, I'm back on another XML project (attempting to define yet another
industry standard DTD) and am looking at tools and standards yet again.
JM Ivler
Technology Visionary
{formerly CTO, but the title sucks\!}
fasturn.com
Scott Redman
far more efficient and much smaller. The Java version and the
C++ version are going in different directions (which is not good)
and Perl uses the C++ version. The C++ code uses a "standard"
subset of the C++ language, which should be reasonable.
At Scriptics, we're using Expat, but if Xerces turns out to be
a worthwhile alternative we may consider switching. What the
Tcl community wants to use may be a different thing, and if
someone builds a Xerces extension it may end up being widely
used. The Java version should be accessible from TclBlend
without any extra work... The C++ version will require a wrapper
extension.
It appears that Apache is working on the "document" side of
XML, generating XML or HTML pages for a browser from XML data.
We're concentrating on server-to-server XML data transfer.
With browser data, you can cache the result, which can mask
any speed problems with the XML libraries.
FYI, Jeff Hobbs is the "Tcl Guy"...
-- Scott
Jeffrey Hobbs
> This will be a post of limited interest, but I was wondering if anyone in
> the TCL community (Steve, Jeffrey, Alexandre, whomever is the person that
> John hired to be the XML guy at Scriptics and even you Cameron) was
> aware of anyone who was working with xml.apache.org to get TCL into the
> Xerces project (which today is Java, C++ and Perl).
To put it a little more to the point than Scott said, I don't see any
justification for Xerxes apart that it was from IBM, and IBM is a
major backer behind xml.apache.org. They may have some nicer license
terms to go with it. Expat has been the true standard until now, and
I don't see why it shouldn't remain so (for now). Xerxes looks to be
an oversized brute that does the same thing. Until I see something
the convincingly gives benies for Xerxes, we shouldn't bother changing.
Right now, it looks to be a "bad idea", or maybe an instance of NIH
syndrome.
--
Jeffrey Hobbs The Tcl Guy
jeffrey.hobbs at scriptics.com Scriptics Corp.
Steve Ball
>
> This will be a post of limited interest, but I was wondering if anyone in
> the TCL community (Steve, Jeffrey, Alexandre, whomever is the person that
> John hired to be the XML guy at Scriptics and even you Cameron) was
> aware of anyone who was working with xml.apache.org to get TCL into the
> Xerces project (which today is Java, C++ and Perl).
I wondered the same thing myself, and have had mail from
Phil Ehrens <peh...@ligo.caltech.edu> to say that they have created
just such a wrapper. I'd suggest getting in contact with Phil.
> Yes, I'm back on another XML project (attempting to define yet another
> industry standard DTD) and am looking at tools and standards yet again.
Cool! Just started a new XML project myself with the Australian
government. The good thing about governments is that they can just
create standards and people have to use them ;-)
Cheers,
Steve Ball
--
Steve Ball | Swish XML Editor | Training & Seminars
Zveno Pty Ltd | Web Tcl Complete | XML XSL
http://www.zveno.com/ | TclXML TclDOM | Tcl, Web Development
Steve...@zveno.com +-----------------------+---------------------
Ph. +61 2 6242 4099 | Mobile (0413) 594 462 | Fax +61 2 6242 4099
David Shepherd
>
> To put it a little more to the point than Scott said, I don't see any
> justification for Xerxes apart that it was from IBM, and IBM is a
> major backer behind xml.apache.org. They may have some nicer license
> terms to go with it. Expat has been the true standard until now, and
> I don't see why it shouldn't remain so (for now). Xerxes looks to be
A quick plug for IBM. I started with the Xerxes parser (actually the IBM
XML4C++ parser) because it seemed to be the most complete validating DOM
parser in C++ around. I haven't been disappointed. It is fast, complete,
flexible, well documented (and yes, it is also pretty big). The license
was OK while IBM had it - the Apache license is better. Expat is OK but
very much a bare-bones implementation. Anyone needing a complete DOM
implementation could do a lot worse than to look at the Xerxes software.
-dave shepherd
--
o David Shepherd
o Independent Software Author
o T/F (+49) 7557 91015
o email: dshe...@t-online.de
o http://home.t-online.de/home/dshepherd
Phil
>"J.M. Ivler" wrote:
>>
>> This will be a post of limited interest, but I was wondering if anyone in
>> the TCL community (Steve, Jeffrey, Alexandre, whomever is the person that
>> John hired to be the XML guy at Scriptics and even you Cameron) was
>> aware of anyone who was working with xml.apache.org to get TCL into the
>> Xerces project (which today is Java, C++ and Perl).
>
>I wondered the same thing myself, and have had mail from
>Phil Ehrens <peh...@ligo.caltech.edu> to say that they have created
>just such a wrapper. I'd suggest getting in contact with Phil.
No, please don't anybody get in touch with me about this. I am
in it up to my ears at the moment and should never have even
mentioned this to Steve. Me and my big mouth. We HAVE wrapped
the IBM code using SWIG, but the wrapper that we have is not
generally useful, and the version of the xml4c code that we wrapped
is heavily modified (we ported it to Solaris and fixed a number of
bugs along the way), and really represents a divergent branch from
Xerces.