Lists Home |
Date Index |
From: "Joe English" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> 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.
But I think this needs to be done for SGML's sake as well. And for
tools which let the user type entity names but which map
them to characters on the way out. And for some
fantasy markup language that used elements to represent
characters, if the ampersand-phobes have their way.
Indeed, one of the reasons for a common mapping would
be to make alternatives and experimentation practicable.