[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: request for XML resources



A few additions and comments embedded.

Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> 
> On Tuesday 7 November 2000, at 2 h 34, the keyboard of John Reinke
> <jmreinke@ukans.edu> wrote:
> 
> > 1) What XML-capable browser do Linux developers generally use to view XML
> > files (using XSL)?
> 
> They translate the XML offline :-)
> 
> More seriously, there is not yet any XML+XSL browser which anyone reasonable
> find ready.
> 
> > 2) What languages and libraries are commonly used?
> 
> Perl, C, Java, Python...

OmniMark (no affiliation) has been around for a long time and was
designed with SGML conversion in mind. Many folks in the commercial
sector see it as premiere and recently it became no-cost software (i.e.,
not free in the Debian sense, but you can download and use it).

Also check out www.xslt.com for XSL-related tools. XSLT is the modern
language used to do transformations of XML to other things. You need an
XSLT processor to do this--there are several.

> > I've found tons of
> > applications written in Java, which I can handle, although I usually prefer
> > Perl or C/C++.
> 
> There are many Perl or C applications.

Look at CPAN (www.cpan.org) for a dozen or so XML-related Perl modules,
including an XSLT module.

> > For parsing libraries, is expat normally used although it's
> > non-validating, or does everyone build their own?
> 
> I don't know if there is an official survey of parser use...

I think it's fair to say that all of the James Clark software is
widely-used and popular. It's one of the most interesting phenomena of
the SGML/XML industry.

> > 3) What Linux applications exist for editing XML, DTD and XSL files?
> 
> emacs
> 
> > there any that can convert an XML file from one DTD to another,
> 
> Any XSL or DSSSL processor, as well as any custom program.
> 
> > answers I need. I wanted to see what is used here, and how people use XML
> > in the "real world".
> 
> Nobody uses it in the real world :-)



Reply to: