This is the mail archive of the
xsl-list@mulberrytech.com
mailing list .
RE: Microsoft XSL and Conformance
- To: "'xsl-list at mulberrytech dot com'" <xsl-list at mulberrytech dot com>
- Subject: RE: Microsoft XSL and Conformance
- From: Jonathan Marsh <jmarsh at microsoft dot com>
- Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2000 09:40:59 -0800
- Reply-To: xsl-list at mulberrytech dot com
This was missent and can easiliy be mis-interpreted. Andy and I, along with
other members of the MSXML team have had a lot of conversations about being
more open to the XML community and putting a human face on our development
activities. Andrew's post is a great example of our moves in this
direction.
Also, this issue has shown that a void of accurate information can quickly
become a forum for "MS bashing" and that the best way we can avoid this is
to provide accurate and timely information to the community.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jonathan Marsh [mailto:jmarsh@microsoft.com]
> Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2000 9:11 AM
> To: 'xsl-list@mulberrytech.com'
> Subject: RE: Microsoft XSL and Conformance
>
>
> Awesome move, Andy! Amazing how quick the mob dispersed...
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Andrew Kimball [mailto:akimball@microsoft.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2000 1:37 AM
> > To: xsl-list@mulberrytech.com
> > Subject: Microsoft XSL and Conformance
> >
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I'm Andy Kimball, the Microsoft XSL developer. After
> today's "nested
> > template abomination" discussion, I had a couple of
> comments. First,
> > Microsoft is committed to delivering a conformant XSLT
> > processor. If you
> > don't believe "Microsoft", then at least believe me. I'm
> > writing the thing.
> > I've often gritted my teeth and implemented some feature that
> > I thought was
> > inelegant, less than useful, or arbitrarily limited, just to
> > be compliant.
> > As I receive feedback from the XSL community, I've been
> > surprised at how
> > vocal and passionate people are about conformance (of course,
> > people also
> > want performance, scalability, and usability without any
> > trade-offs, and
> > they want it yesterday--unrealistic, but understandable).
> > Now, I may not be
> > able to cross every tiny 't', and dot every insignificant
> > 'i', but I will
> > make a good-faith effort to implement according to the 1.0
> > spec. If you
> > find conformance problems that concern you, feel free to
> e-mail me at
> > akimball@microsoft.com.
> >
> > ~Andy Kimball
> >
> >
> > XSL-List info and archive:
> http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
> >
>
>
> XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
>
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list