Lists Home |
Date Index |
From: "Mike Champion" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> I personally have no problem
> with it -- whether it be a bug or a feature -- simply because it *seems* to
> reflect the reality that I repeatedly hear about: one can make significant
> optimizations in an implementation if there is some understanding that
> there will be no entities to expand.
What are these optimizations?
It wouldn't be decreased parse time, it wouldn't be decrease disk/net IO (if the
entity is used more than once, it may even be slower), it wouldn't be table sizes
(if they are constructed lazily first time they are needed), it wouldn't be the
output SAX or DOM. Allowing entities and not using them should not affect
The only thing that springs to mind is a smaller parser and factionally faster load
times, but that is not an "optimization" and (compare Xerces and XP) *how*
a spec is implemented can easily increase the footprint more than the raw