[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

RE: Why not canonical parsers? [Was: Pull-based XML parsers? ]

• From: Gavin Thomas Nicol <gtn@e...>
• To: xml-dev@l...
• Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 00:50:13 -0800

> I personaly want the same XML parsers everywhere
> but if there is a real need for lightweight parsers (and it looks
> like there is with devices with mediocre computing power, elsewhere it
> is a very poor excuse not to implement or use conformant one) then 
> it should be at least some format which will be readable by fully
> conformant parsers.

I agree with the sentiment, but even in smaller devices, I don't think
XML parsing (well-formed) is *too* expensive. I talked to some people
recently that were implementing an XML+CSS browser for embedded systems
(phone, TV's) for example.

• References:
  • Re: Why not canonical parsers? [Was: Pull-based XML parsers? ]
    • From: Miloslav Nic <nicmila@i...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Subsetting/ Canonical Parsers/ XML Compliance/ etc.
• Next by Date: RE: Subsetting/ Canonical Parsers/ XML Compliance/ etc.
• Previous by thread: Re: Why not canonical parsers? [Was: Pull-based XML parsers? ]
• Next by thread: Re: Why not canonical parsers? [Was: Pull-based XML parsers? ]
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread