[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
At 10:48 PM 6/23/2002 +0100, Rob Lugt wrote:
>Simon St.Laurent wrote
> > >Sure, I was thinking of adding these extensions (perhaps they should be
> > >called contractions) as an option to ElCel's xmlcanon [1]. Would anybody
> > >find this useful?
> >
> > As long as it's a separate part and not built right into the parser, it
> > sounds good to me.
>
>That would only be possible if the suggested changes were handled by some
>kind of pre-processor. I don't think such a pre-processor would be viable;
>it would need to have all the features of an XML parser itself.
I'd rather see a pre-processor which ran over the stream and kept track of
start and end element happening. There's no need for this to be a complete
parser, by any means. Transformation from not-XML to XML isn't that radical
a process, at least not in the ways you've proposed.
>However, I
>don't see updating the XML parser as being a problem, so long as the
>extensions are controlled by options which are disabled by default.
I see that as an ugly mistake that's going to make people think these
features are fine, once they set the option.
Simon St.Laurent
"Every day in every way I'm getting better and better." - Emile Coue
|
