On Thu, Oct 31, 2002 at 02:25:23PM -0500, Jeremy Bowers wrote: > Timm Murray wrote: > >I don't want to discourage you, but a bit of warning: a lot of people > >around here don't like XML, and you'll probably get a lot of flack for > >pushing it (the last guy did). But if you make something that can really > >prove its worth, people will respect you. > > The point of XML-RPC is not the "XML", it's the wide variety of > implementations. > > http://www.xmlrpc.com/directory/1568/implementations > > And I'm not convinced that's all of them, either. > > The XML is just a convenient format. This is in contrast to the > quickly-bloating SOAP, where XML is an issue and every stupid, asinine > XML standard is complexifying it every which way possible. > > Unfortunately, I was just tossing together a quick Freenet-based project > with a little extra time; I'm already committed on other open-source > projects and can't spend the time to add an XML-RPC interface. But I > would recommend adding that to any long-term wishlist you may be keeping > around, or list of ways that people can contribute without needing to > understand the protocol intimately; it would increase the value of the > software significantly. FCP really isn't difficult. It's much easier than a modern implementation of HTTP, for example. FNP is of course a total pig. > > In the meantime, I totally understand that your current priority is > basically "get the *(#*%@'in thing working", so this is not a demand or > criticism. Thanks for a kick-ass free speech tool. > > > _______________________________________________ > Tech mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://hawk.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tech >
-- Matthew Toseland [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freenet/Coldstore open source hacker. Employed full time by Freenet Project Inc. from 11/9/02 to 11/11/02. http://freenetproject.org/
msg00982/pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
