Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
keshlam@u... writes:
> There's nothing wrong with SAX (though it too needs another turn of
> the evolutionary crank, in my opinion), but SAX is a stream rather
> than a model. The two really aren't in competition with each other
> any more than sed is in competition with vi -- they're each good in
> their own target domain, and there are even times when using one to
> generate the other is the right answer.
Wow! I hadn't been following this thread, and had no idea that there
was a DOM vs. SAX flame war going on. Very cool.
While I believe that some flame wars are justified -- Emacs really is
better than vi, Java really is better than C++, Linux really is better
than Windows, and my Border Collie really is better than anyone's Jack
Russell Terrier, all on objective and clearly verifiable grounds -- in
this case I agree with both of Joe's points:
1. SAX and DOM are complementary
2. SAX and DOM both need a little more work
All the best,
David
--
David Megginson david@m...
http://www.megginson.com/
xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i...
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)
|
