OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help



   Re: Pull-based XML parsers?

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]
  • From: Rick JELLIFFE <ricko@geotempo.com>
  • To: ",Xml-Dev (E-mail)" <xml-dev@lists.xml.org>
  • Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 18:18:22 +0800

Jeff Lowery wrote:
> Is anyone aware of any pull-based XML parsers other than kxml?
> http://www-ai.cs.uni-dortmund.de/SOFTWARE/KXML/JAVADOC/overview-summary.html

It is interesting that the dangers of Common XML can be seen from this:
rather than a guide for what parts of XML Simon thinks are most
"frequently used (implemented) and reliable" for document and language
creators, it is being used to decide what bits of XML a parser
implementer can pick and choose.

The Common XML document is very clear about this danger " It is not a
set of rules for creating parsers or other software."

Of course, there is no harm in people making experimental and academic
XML parsers to test ideas, and starting with a common subset is a good
idea too.  And there is no harm in making a true subset XML parser that
developers can use in specific systems (XML is a subset of SGML, why
should there not be subsets of XML?)  And Simon's Common XML should be
required reading for anyone trying to understand how things fit

But I urge developers to boycott any XML parsers that do not attempt to
provide full support for XML 1.0, in any general-purpose development.  
If you use them, *you* are creating interoperability problems, not the
people who use XML 1.0 in their documents.  Perhaps the kxml people
might put in a paragraph in their documentation warning against using
their system in general-purpose applications too.



News | XML in Industry | Calendar | XML Registry
Marketplace | Resources | MyXML.org | Sponsors | Privacy Statement

Copyright 2001 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS