> On a similar note, I thought the idea behind the XMLDB api was to > provide a generic communication protocol for working with Native XML > Database contents thats independent of Vendor. Seems IDE's that would be > pushing to develop "XMLDB" specific client tooling, and not "Xindice" > specific tooling would be more successfull and have the widest audience.
You're absolutely right. If I had 10 lives (or 10 slaves :-) ) I would merge the tools/admin applications of Xindice + eXist + xmldbGUI. Of course there will be differences (like eXist not supporting XUpdate) but if the API is well thought, this can be easily resolved. > So, while writting a "Xindice plug-in" for Eclipse is neat I'm not a fan of the Eclipse plug-in because I don't see who will use it. I'm on Linux and I have the choice between downloading 0kb and using the WebDav compliant Conqueror browser of download 60Mb and install Eclipse... And the relative success of the Eclipse plug-in says it all. I'm not flaming anyone here it's just a fact. > Couldn't the same be applied to WebDav? Should it be a WebDav service > for Xindice, or a WebDav interface for an XMLDB Service that just > happens to be the Xindice implementation? I don't see the difficulty and it's certainly possible. I haven't looked at WebDav too much. Mark, I'm waiting for your patches :-) -Vladimir -- Vladimir R. Bossicard www.bossicard.com
