Lists Home |
Date Index |
- From: firstname.lastname@example.org
- To: email@example.com,firstname.lastname@example.org
- Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 9:44:50 +0000
For this kind of purpose, I think the grove formalism is massive
overkill; right now people can whip off XML parsers in a week, if
we require them to master grove plans and property sets and so on,
we're tripling the amount of time that has to be invested.
I think it's true to say that soon all SGML/XML applications will be
working on the parse tree (or grove) rather than the raw events.
With this in mind, I would be quite willing to wait two weeks longer
for a good XML grove API (after all, we've been waiting years for
SGML tools :)
If nothing comes up, I will have to write my own "parse tree builder"
and you can bet it won't be compatible with anyone else's, beyond
the simple notions of "element" and "tree".
This is part of the problem; last time I looked, the SGML property
set was over 75 pages in length, and most of what it contains is
just not interesting for XML parsers.
As someone's already said, we need to define the reduced property
set for XML and make it easier to understand.
If we could just agree, specifically for Java, how to talk to a
few basic things (Element, Attribute, etc), this would be a huge
step forward. -Tim
I don't agree. XML isn't just a "Web thing". It has the potential to
change the way applications communicate and store information.
The XML is actually unimportant, it is the structure (represented
in memory by the parse tree) which counts. We need common
APIs to manipulate and query the structure.
An interesting discussion either way...
xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
To unsubscribe, send to email@example.com the following message;
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (firstname.lastname@example.org)