dcsimg
www.webdeveloper.com
Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: MSXML 4.0 on Pocket PC 2002

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    livermore, ca
    Posts
    2

    Lightbulb MSXML 4.0 on Pocket PC 2002

    Is anyone aware if there is much interest in the community for XSL support for Pocket PC 2002? According to a contact at Microsoft, they feel there is "not a lot of customer demand for an XSLT processor".
    We are developing a mobile computing strategy here at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, of which XML development and content delivery is a major consideration.
    We would prefer to use client-side XML content delivery, and at the same time avoid dual development for Pocket PC and Palm OS handheld devices. Currently Palm OS devices are the majority, but we expect that soon to change. As we understand it, Pocket PC supports only MSXML 3.0. With the new MSXML 4.0 feature set, including XPath, Schema, and XSLT implementations, we believe we could develop for both platforms with minimal effort. We built a client-side XML version of our Handheld Working Group Web site as a technical reference model, based on W3C standards.
    We considered server-side delivery. Resin is available on our institutional Web servers. The problem involves the lack of needed skill sets, the processing load required and the distributed nature of the development and delivery. Many programs use their own servers.
    With that said, we would greatly appreciate any advice and information you can give us.


    Thanks for your time.
    Robert Seymour
    Mobile Computing Architect
    Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
    seymour10@llnl.gov

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    XYZZY - UK
    Posts
    1,760
    I can understand why you want to use client side processing however, is that not a little short-sighted since it is likely in the future there will be more clients using other than MSXML 3.0.

    I can understand why Micro$oft felt there was not a huge customer demand for an XSLT processor, as it would mean there would be a huge load on the processing cycles.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    livermore, ca
    Posts
    2

    Lightbulb

    Currently Pocket PC 2002 only supports MSXML 3.0, a W3C non-standard parser. No other browser supports this standard. MSXLM 4.0 is a W3C compatible parser. Added to that MSXML 4.0 has support for XSL/XSLT, DOM, XPATH, XML Schema,and SAX. XML 3.0 does not. With MSXML 4.0 support in Pocket Internet Explorer, XML developers need only write one set of XML programs for all browsers.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    XYZZY - UK
    Posts
    1,760
    Yes, I knew the MSXML 3.0 relied on the Working Draft (WD) rather than the final Technical Recommendation, that is why many XML tutorials on the web are incorrect because the were written for the WD rather than Technical Recommendation although you are still placing the load on the Pocket PC it you lets it's own XSLT processor do the donkey-work.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1
    Hello,

    I found this thread while looking for a solution, and thought I'd chime in for a second...

    I am currently developing PDA software that retrieves an xml file from our controller unit, and builds its GUI according to what is described in the xml. Because of a redesign of the xml file to cater to our growing wishes, we decided to use XSL to transform the new style of xml into the old, so our application could remain operational with minimal additions.

    I did some research, and was quite wrongly under the impression that the xsl transform was very possible on my pocket pc 2003 device (WinCE4.2).

    This article: http://www.pocketpcdn.com/articles/xmlfaq.html states that MSXML 3 ships for Windows CE 4.X.

    But our support people blatantly stated that I should hop over to Windows Mobile 5.0, which does support msxml4! All I want is a possibility to fully employ the XSL transforms in WinCE4.2, but apparently there isn't enough reason for microsoft to implement this?


    As a side note, if someone can point me to a (different) solution, I would be overjoyed!

    Regards,

    Robin Oudhuis

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
HTML5 Development Center



Recent Articles