new comer

Hi there, James has once invited me to this mailing list and recommended me to join the CVS for the translation of the manual in a few languages I speak. Since I'm here and up for it, would you guys mind to help me out and give me some better idea on what the PHP-EVANGELISM is all about. Sincerely, Maxim Maletsky maxim@php.net > -----Original Message----- > From: James Cox [mailto:james@wherewithal.com] > Sent: Saturday, April 27, 2002 3:47 PM > To: Dave Mertens; Andi Gutmans > Cc: php-evangelism@lists.php.net > Subject: RE: [PHP-EVANGELISM] PHP evangelism tools : where we are > > > > > On Sat, Apr 27, 2002 at 12:49:09PM +0300, Andi Gutmans wrote: > > At 09:48 27/04/2002 +0200, Dave Mertens wrote: > > >On Sat, Apr 27, 2002 at 02:20:37AM +0300, Andi Gutmans wrote: > > > > I just wanted to say that I think this is a great and extremely > important > > > > initiative. > > > > As .NET and Java are becoming more and more hyped with web services > > > > solutions we definitely need to do this kind of stuff. > > >This weekend/next week I'm writing a proof-of-concept webservice in PHP > > >using the pear soap classes. Clients for it i will write in PHP, asp and > > >.net (to show also 'foreign' languages can use these webservices) > > > > Sounds good. By the way, I saw there are a few web services PHP > > implementations. Does anyone know how the PEAR one ranks compared to the > > other ones? > > Are these webservices also public (code and use)?? I have to convince a hard > Microsoft fan that PHP is the right tool for his website. So i have to proof > that languages such as ASP and Java could access these webservices as well > ofcourse PHP. > > I also heared people say the Google soap API was written in PHP, but somehow > i can't believe it. Google isn't using PHP on their site, so why should they > use php for their soap API and not their regular C/C++ interface?? > > as i understand it, Google are not using PHP, but Python, for their front > end stuff. > > > >I must say the new domxml (libxml2) support is php is much better than > the > > >expat version.. Also the functionnaming looks more to SAX and the MSXML > > >parser. I'm sorry to say, but the MS XML parser really kick azz. Sorry > > >again.. > > > > Nothing to be sorry about. This is important to know but it takes people > > like you who know MSXML and want to do something about it to go and do the > > actual coding :) > Sorry, i can't program C/C++. But libxml2 is a big advantage when you look > at expat. If you use expat you have to write you own parser. Where libxml > parses the xml as an object three and could also be access as that. Also the > support for Xpath (XML query language) is very good. But unfortunaly domxml > is still experimental, so i can't use it in a production environment. My > boss > will kill me if he finds out I'm using experimental software ;-) > > I am researching aspects of various web services protocols, with a view to > expanding on the PHP webservice offereing. i'll keep you posted. > > > -- > PHP Evangelism Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php