Our company (www.ephiphany.com) would probably also use this (COM API) I am using XERCES-C for our internal useage but we need to support integration within an IIS, MTS, VB, and ASP environments. We would have recommended the MSXML interface for those, but if performance is a problem, haveing a 'look alike' would be a great thing.
----- Original Message ----- From: Scott Sanders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, March 01, 2000 1:11 PM Subject: RE: COM Wrapper for Xerces (was: Xerces-C Multithreading) > I would test it out the wazzoo. I am but a lowly VB programmer, but I have > used the MSXML interfaces alot, > so testing a lookalike would be fairly trivial. > > With that said, it is possible that our company may pick up Xerces, and that > _may_ bring some more resources to bear. > > Scott Sanders > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, March 01, 2000 11:53 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: COM Wrapper for Xerces (was: Xerces-C Multithreading) > > > > I think this would be a cool feature. One of the points of COM is the > clean separation of interface and implementation. If we can support the MS > interfaces, but drop in a better implementation, then we'll all have more > choices when working on Win32. A COM wrapper for Xalan/C would be nice as > well,hypothetically speaking. I guess it depends on whether there are > enough interested MS/COM type programmers here to sustain such an effort. > > -Rob > > > > > > Mike Pogue > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > e.org> cc: (bcc: Robert > Weir/CAM/Lotus) > Subject: Re: Xerces-C > Multithreading > 03/01/00 > > 02:32 PM > > Please > > respond to > > xerces-dev > > > > > > > > > > So, are you suggesting that if you had a COM wrapper for Xerces-C, that > looked just like the > MS COM API's, you might use it? Speaking hypothetically, of course. > > If such a thing existed, would you be willing to help test it and maintain > it? > > Hypothetically speaking, > Mike > > Scott Sanders wrote: > > > > >MSXML is also not Open Source and not cross-platform... > > > > I am well aware of that. They are not. > > > > >I'm curious, does your group already have MSXML code written in COM? > > Yes, that is the case. Our application is so COM distributed that COM is > > necessary (ironic?) > > > >
