Lists Home |
Date Index |
I totally agree. Unless you are going to a lot of work in the
application to ensure concurrency. But even then it is all application
Elliotte Rusty Harold wrote:
> At 6:58 AM -0700 4/15/04, Jeff Rafter wrote:
>> Agreed, well-formednes must be checked. But surely it doesn't need to be
>> checked every time a document is parsed (if it is unchanged). I think
>> is definitely room for a parser that can emit SAX events (or something)
>> without bogging down in Wellformedness checks. For example, if a
>> document is
>> received from a partner, wellformedness is checked, and then pushed
>> into a
>> database text field for later processing, there is no need to recheck
> How do you know no other process or person has modified the field in
> the mean time?
>> In fact, when it is parsed again later, there is no need to
>> do a lot of things-- like check end tags-- if wellformedness is known a
>> priori the start tag can be pushed onto a stack, and popped when </
>> is read.
>> Then the "parser" can simply skip the length of the end tag. There
>> are lots
>> of savings like this-- duplicate attribute checking for example can be
>> costly-- but would be unnecessary if wfness was assumed.
> But well-formedness can't be assumed. That's the core of XML.