• To: XML Dev <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: Re: To tree, or not to tree ...(was Re: The subsetting has begun)
• From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
• Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2003 11:12:48 -0500
• In-reply-to: <oprlc5drmwezizxn@s...>

mc@x... (Mike Champion) writes:
>>> You claimed that a parser *has* to model the XML instance as a tree.
>>> DOM-type parsers do, but SAX-type parsers just don't.
>>
>> No, I didn't. But I can see the tree from the maps :)
>
>Ooooh, this is getting into deep philosophical territory ... "If a
>tree grows from the SAX forest but there is no one there to see it, is
>it still a 'tree'????"  <grin>

Sometimes I want to treat it as a tree, sometimes I don't.  As long as
no one tells me that it must be a tree, I don't really care.  Seems
easier that way.

-- 
Simon St.Laurent
Ring around the content, a pocket full of brackets
Errors, errors, all fall down!
http://simonstl.com -- http://monasticxml.org

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: To tree, or not to tree ...(was Re: The subsetting has begun)
    • From: "Danny Ayers" <danny666@v...>

• References:
  • To tree, or not to tree ...(was Re: The subsetting has begun)
    • From: Mike Champion <mc@x...>

• Prev by Date: To tree, or not to tree ...(was Re: The subsetting has begun)
• Next by Date: [ANN] Sarissa, a cross browser JS API for DOM extentions
• Previous by thread: To tree, or not to tree ...(was Re: The subsetting has begun)
• Next by thread: RE: To tree, or not to tree ...(was Re: The subsetting has begun)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread