Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
"Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...> writes: > I think it's just that you've got a different use case for XPath > than I do. > > I'm not looking for large-scale high-speed processing - I just need > to explore and convert these critters periodically, and I'd rather > use the more familiar world of XML processing to do it than start > over with XPath-specific processing models. > > I've found that working with different kinds of information as XML > is very convenient. Not necessarily efficient, and it still leaves > a lot of work to be done, but it lets me work efficiently with a set > of tools I understand well. I think this topic has come up before regarding "mini-languages" with respect to XML. A neat utility would be a parser-tool (comparible to yacc, for example) that would parse a syntax to produce XML output (SAX/DOM/Grove) for the resulting parse tree. -- Ken
|
