RE: Is DOM more efficient than SAX for smaller xml instances?

["Jelks Cabaniss" <jelks@xxxxxxxx>]

bryan rasmussen wrote:
> I seem to remember once, long ago, reading something showing DOM was
> more efficient than SAX for small XML instances - small being approx
> 40 kb.

It's true.  All you have to do is look at the charts:

  <http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=DOM&t=5y&l=on&z=m&q=l&c=SAX>

Seems that SAX got off to a good start, but DOM has clearly predominated
(please pardon the pun).

Also note that DOM is popular in Alabama, while SAX predominates (again,
please pardon the pun) in Virginia.

Then again, Morgan Stanley just recently bought SAX, so one should expect
its fortunes to change.


/Jelks