From: Helge Hess (helge.hess@skyrix.com)
Date: Fri Oct 13 2000 - 14:10:49 EDT
Daniel Veillard wrote:
> The problem is that XPath data model and versatility
> forces to keep enough information about your document state that
> enarly every bits of the DOM constructs are actually used by the
> XPath interpretation engine.
I think I already proposed that once, IMHO it would be very nice if
libxml would follow the 'interface' idea, this would make it's parts
much more reusable.
Eg in the case of DOM it would be quite easy to abstract - basically the
same as SAX. You would have an opaque pointer storing the state in
whatever way the user likes and a set of DOM callbacks (say: methods).
This way you could use stuff like xpath support, validation, .. with any
DOM implementation that can interface to C (eg you could have callbacks
that work on Python objects representing the DOM).
Of course that is probably out of the scope of libxml, but it would be
nice nevertheless - just my opinion.
best regards
Helge
---- Message from the list xml@rpmfind.net Archived at : http://xmlsoft.org/messages/ to unsubscribe: echo "unsubscribe xml" | mail majordomo@rpmfind.net
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Oct 13 2000 - 15:43:19 EDT