|
| Chuck Stevens wrote:
> "LX-i" <lxi0007@netscape.net> wrote in message
> news:5a47b$42685456$45491db9$15115@KNOLO
GY.NET...
>
>
>
>
> Have you looked at "Native COBOL Syntax for XML Support", a Preliminary
> Draft Technical Report written by Don Schricker and proposed as a follow-on
> for the 2002 COBOL standard (as well as for later incorporation into the '08
> standard)?
Yes, I've seen that - looks  . :)
>
>
> I'd be interested in your thoughts on how what you're doing would be
> simplified (or made more complicated) if it was done using the syntax in
> Don's PDTR. Maybe you could lobby the 2200/IX folks, as a customer, that
> this is something customers need, and get compiler support for this stuff
> built in (even on a pre-2002-standard COBOL, as an extension)?
Well, what I've been doing is accruing the XML in a 100,000-character
buffer (the max a single MCB call can take) - then, I send it straight
from TIP to the browser. It might be made easier, if that file could
somehow be made a stream of text - it would also allow us to get away
from that 100,000-character limit. (There are some things we'd like to
do, but that limit is too small - of course, documents that get much
bigger than that can take some time to parse on the client...)
I actually did some work with some of the folks in Roseville, and one of
them is the guy who's in charge of the UCS COBOL compiler. He told me I
could bend his ear one day for a while, so I'm writing down things I
wanted to ask him about. I'll put this on the list... :)
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~ / \ / ~ Live from Montgomery, AL! ~
~ / \/ o ~ ~
~ / /\ - | ~ daniel@thebelowdomain ~
~ _____ / \ | ~ http://www.djs-consulting.com ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ GEEKCODE 3.12 GCS/IT d s-:+ a C++ L++ E--- W++ N++ o? K- w$ ~
~ !O M-- V PS+ PE++ Y? !PGP t+ 5? X+ R* tv b+ DI++ D+ G- e ~
~ h---- r+++ z++++ ~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|
|