Standards are given by those who define it, so neither the W3C DDR API nor the CC/PP standard also by W3C (and related JSR 188 https://jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=188) may seem "modern" or "sexy". Yet, there are many large customers who use them or even more "archeological" ones like CORBA or IMS/Host (just chewing on such "dinosaur bone" for current client;-)
I was asked to explore tapping into devicemap from the Java Portlet standard and this standard supports CC/PP: https://portals.apache.org/pluto/portlet-2.0-apidocs/javax/portlet/PortletRequest.html#CCPP_PROFILE Therefore as with all standards, referring to another standard is OK, however old or "clumsy" it may seem. Kind Regards, Werner On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 9:00 AM, Stefan Seelmann <m...@stefan-seelmann.de> wrote: > On 07/14/2015 01:02 AM, Werner Keil wrote: > > Glad to see so many care about W3C standards After all or pay tribute to > > the fact, that people check it out or use it ;-) > > And e.g. Stefan's recent input also indicates they do. > > Well, I think you understood me wrong. > > I can't speak for others, but I only checked out the SVN trunk because > I'm courious and interested in the project, then I grepped for 'firefox' > and found some of the specialized builder classes. I don't 'use' the W3C > client, I just did a quick evaluation, and I was not very happy with it > (performance, no detection of firefox/windows, clumsy API) > > From an Apache project I expect that there are official releases of > their flagship software, but the website just guides me to one client > and the data. > > Kind Regards, > Stefan >
