[XML-SIG] Scriptics Connect
Tue, 26 Oct 1999 11:02:08 +1000
That is precisley the problem that should be addressed - documentation.
As a relatively new user to PYTHON but with 9 years SGML / XML experience, I
was struggling to lean the language (not too hard) and deal with the XML
tool kits and public domain software.
I found that in some cases it was easier to write something myself rather
than to deal with a peice of software I had found on the net. In many
instances the documentation was completly wrong or referred to an earlier
If we want Joe Public to accept python as a serious tool for XML processing
then it sure needs to be made easier to get up to speed.
My 2c for what it's worth
Moore Business Systems
----- Original Message -----
From: Fred Yankowski <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 1999 12:47 AM
Subject: Re: [XML-SIG] Scriptics Connect
> On Mon, Oct 25, 1999 at 10:17:42AM -0400, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> > Has anyone seen this in action? What should be our response? Python
> > used to be #1 in the XML scripting world -- lately, I don't see that
> > much activity... :-(
> Well, what's our goal? The XML-SIG page says:
> With appropriate software packages, documentation, and a bit
> of publicity, Python could become the premier language for XML
> processing. The goal of this SIG is to decide what software is
> required for this purpose, and coordinate its implementation
> and documentation.
> So, where is the SIG falling short? Is there specific XML processing
> functionality that is missing? If so, what is the most important? Is
> the Python XML software too hard to install? Is the main problem a
> lack of documentation and examples? What are the most important
> problems that the XML-SIG could/should address now?
> Fred Yankowski <email@example.com>
> P.S. I've seen the "wish list" on the XML-SIG status page, but it
> seems to be a grab-bag of ideas that might not be current or complete,
> and the priorities are not obvious.
> XML-SIG maillist - XML-SIG@python.org