Lists Home |
Date Index |
Rick Jelliffe wrote:
> John Cowan:
> > Rick Jelliffe scripsit:
> > > The only approach that I have seen that makes sense is to build in
> > > a fixed standard set of characters into XML, with known mappings.
> > It's a lot of bulk to carry around, and where do you stop?
> All entities currently standardized: those from ISO/OASIS/W3C.
This would make the idea of a "lightweight XML parser"
an oxymoron. The name-to-entity mapping table alone would
be bigger than the rest of the parser in most cases.
It would take longer to initialize the mapping table than
it would to parse a medium-sized XML document.
Going out on limb here, but I don't believe XML needs this
feature. People who are concerned about ease of authoring
should be using SGML instead.