ALFS Status: Past and future [was Re: new guy, newbie questions.]

Jesse Tie-Ten-Quee highos at
Tue Jan 22 16:58:14 PST 2002


On Tue, Jan 22, 2002 at 10:18:57AM -0500, Arthur H. Johnson II wrote:
> Here is a question that may get me in trouble, but what about using nALFS
> for the standard?  It seems stable enough.

I do remenber Neven mentioned he didn't want to see nALFS become an
"official" version, but would prefer to stay compatible with the
official profile syntax instead, believing that it would be better to
have more options... i tend to agree.

Another issue is that nALFS is licensed under the GPL.  All material
that is developed by LFS and subprojects goes under a BSD licensed.
That decision was made a long time ago, i seriously doubt it will

[And let's not get into that right now, allright.. if you honestly want
to know why the BSD license was choosen, read the first couple of months
of the mailing list archives, specificaly a thread with Mark Stone
describing the different licenes and there implications, IIRC]

Either way, nALFS works and Neven is most likelly going to be staying
compatible with the specification, so no worries.

But.  I can't speak for Neven.  If i'm wrong Neven, *please* speak up, i
don't want to put words in you're mouth =)

[PS, on a more personal note:  The one thing i don't like about nALFS is
it's use of expat.  I just don't like it, neither the way SAX is
implemented in C.  It's really nice in Java..but eww when i look at
expat.  Not to mention the fact that it's limited to XML 1.0/XML
Namespaces. (that isn't a bad thing really, it makes it nice and
small/compat.  But would suck if we ever decided it would be fun to
implemente XML Path, XML Pointer or XML Include support)]

Jesse Tie-Ten-Quee  ( highos at linuxfromscratch dot org )
Unsubscribe: send email to listar at
and put 'unsubscribe alfs-discuss' in the subject header of the message

More information about the alfs-discuss mailing list