Lists Home |
Date Index |
- From: "Hunter, David" <dhunter@Mobility.com>
- To: 'Don Park' <email@example.com>, firstname.lastname@example.org
- Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 09:53:59 -0500
Perhaps from the point of view of a parser writer, this might be a good
thing. If you knew you were never going to need these constructs, you could
build a smaller, faster parser.
>From the point of view of applications that use XML, however, SML would not
provide much gain, except perhaps the slight speed advantage of using one of
these stripped down, souped up parsers; as Leigh Dodds pointed out, you
could just use XML without the features you don't need.
So the two points to consider:
-are the speed advantages of one of these SML parsers significant over an
-with XML parsers [hopefully] becoming ubiquitous in most systems, are
people really going to use SML and SML parsers, when they can just use XML?
xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:email@example.com
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To unsubscribe, mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org the following message;
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:email@example.com the following message;
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org)