From: ser@... (Sean Russell)
Date: 2003-02-25T12:11:38+09:00
Subject: Re: REXML 2.5.7 and 2.4.7

"MikkelFJ" <mikkelfj-anti-spam@bigfoot.com> wrote in message news:<3e596fbf$0$149$edfadb0f@dtext01.news.tele.dk>...
....
> Actually I thought it looked so nice that I looked at what program you
> used - estimating something like emacs - just to discover it was google :-)

If you're making a funny, it's goin' waaaay over my head.  Google? 
Where did that come from?

Ooooh, you're talking about the *posting*.  I was talking about the
Germane-Software web pages.  :-)  Yeah, I've been without a real
Usenet feed for a while.

As for the G-S website, a friend by the name of David Caley did the
basic site design (if you want his email or services, let me know...
he's always looking for work); I converted it to XSL, and the pages
sources are maintained in XML and are regenerated as they change.  All
of the graphics are SVG, converted to PNG.  Ruby serves the software/*
pages, which are all dynamically generated.  That code started as
rblosxom; I hacked the bejeezus out of it, and what you see are the
results.

> By the way, could you be specific on the version of IE, XML and XSLT?
> Older versions are known to be erhh odd - and the compatibility mode on
> subsequent upgrades didn't help. I'm no export but I think recent versions
> are much better.

Oh, we're probably using something pretty old.  We have a fairly
recent version of IE for a not-so-recent version of NT on the test
machines at work.  I can't post version numbers at the moment; the
closest Windows machine to me is probably in a neighbor's apartment
somewhere.

Anyway, I'm not too concerned about supporting IE.  I'm reluctant to
do a lot of work to get around other people's buggy code.  *Fixing*
other people's buggy code is one thing, but working around other
people's commercial, close-sourced, buggy code is another matter
entirely.