[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
* Uche Ogbuji <uche.ogbuji@fourthought.com> [2005-01-01 13:09]:
> On Fri, 2004-12-31 at 00:09 -0800, Michael Rys wrote:
> > PS: I assume that you would choose the iterator's semantics to be
> > declarative and not procedural...
>
> Yes, although another side-thread I got sucked into seems to show
> that many consider it a violation of SAX's basic nature to define
> it in any terms other than a procedural execution model. Perhaps
> I'm a bit too imaginative, I must say that such a limitation would
> tend to make me agree with you and Florescu at least to the extent
> that SAX is not an appropriate basis for specifying this XPattern
> we're discussing. I agree that it should be a declarative basis
> (and never would have meant to imply otherwise).
SAX is not much of a basis for experssing anything except the
boundry between streaming XML handlers, which it does well.
I would like to look for uses of XPattern in my streaming
library that is SAX oriented.
--
Alan Gutierrez - alan@engrm.com
|
