Well said. I was polishing my own answer to this, but you said it better :P
Regards Erik Rydgren Mandarinen systems AB Sweden -----Original Message----- From: Ian Brown [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: den 13 mars 2002 11:39 To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: adv of xerces? That's a matter of opinion. For me xerces is fantastic, and a major part of that is the open-sourceness. While you would hope that any 3rd party software you use is bug free and does everything you could hope for it often isn't so open source means: - that if you simple must get 'x' fixed/changed you can do it - that if you want it to work on another platform/compiler/OS version its possible - that if the company drops support for the product, it doesn't matter. You have the source, you can keep going as long as you like and even port to new OS's etc. (Basically thanks to the developers that funded xerces) Ian -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 13 March 2002 10:07 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: adv of xerces? >>What are the advantages of using Xercesc over MSXML 4.0?:p> > > > Xerces-C is open source, MSXML is not. > If this is the only one this is nothing. Adib. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
