I decided to compete with xml.com and to run my own XML-DEV digest
Kidding, not to worry.
The question about XML
IDE, though, attracted my attention, because it's of such a broad interest for everybody and because of unexpected results... XML-DEV list's gurus almost unanimously decided:
1) there is one top XML IDE
2) it is not XML Spy
2) it is
Emacs Don Box: "I and most of my friends use Emacs. The NT version has been pretty stable for at least a year, and the built-in SGML mode has proven more than functional (for me at least). I know of at least one person who likes the XSLT mode for Emacs, but I didn't care for it.
BTW, the price is hard to complain about."
http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/200207/msg01028.html Tim Bray: "Er, many years. Also, Windows emacs is better than *n*x emacs because there is *no confusion* over which keys are ackspace/delete, and no escape sequences, and the names for F-keys and so on never change. I haven't changed my .emacs on windows for years and years, and I have to fiddle with it on linux/unix systems whenever I change terminal emulators or versions or look away from the screen too long. (Oooh, I'm gonna get flamed).
>, and the built-in SGML mode has proven more
> than functional (for me at least).
And if you don't like it you can write your own; lots of us have."
http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/200207/msg01043.html Bob DuCharme: "I too am part of the cult of Emacs; wen I need to create or edit a W3C schema I load the DTD for schemas into Emacs with PSGML.
I once wrote a tutorial on using Emacs+PSGML aimed at people who'd never used Emacs before. When the book I wrote it for went out of print, I put a PDF of that chapter up for free at
http://www.snee.com/bob/sgmlfree/. I'm amazed at how often it still gets downloaded, and that it's been translated to Polish and Russian. To those not in the cult of Emacs (picture me making a smiling, glassy-eyed stare): join us... it's free... it doesn't hurt... just try it for a week or two..."
http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/200207/msg01069.html XML Spy was also mentioned, though with some reservation:
Bob DuCharme:
" I've seen XML Spy consider DTDs to be "valid" when they had bad mistakes in them that any other parser would find."
http://www.snee.com/bob/sgmlfree/psgmqref.html link doesn't work for me, here is another from the same source in case somebody is interested:
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/hoenicka_markus/ntsgml.html (Russian translation of Bob DuCharme's text works
http://xtalk.opensource.ru/SGML/em.html)
[ July 26, 2002: Message edited by: Mapraputa Is ]