• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: XML should NOT be a new programming language
• From: Sean McGrath <sean.mcgrath@p...>
• Date: Mon, 04 Mar 2002 09:47:18 +0000
• In-reply-to: <003401c1c20f$efb35590$0bf13044@tbp>
• References: <ZVVPLGFDMHFD73KGC0A8QLMIMG3VB0JF.3c80fc7f@MChamp>

At 12:30 02/03/2002 -0500, Thomas B. Passin wrote:

>It would be interesting to learn what other kinds of non-xml SAX generators
>people have written.  Anyone care to say?

I wrote one in Python to allow you to treat any MySQL SELECT statement
as a SAX event source. For me, it only re-inforced the feeling that getting
such a thing to generate an intermediate notation rather than an
event stream is a better way to go - decoupling and all that.

Unfortunately, intermediate notational forms only thrive in environments
that support pipeline architectures.

Personally, I think the beneifits are so significant that it is worth providing
the pipelining substrate rather than live with the consequences of
tightly coupling. e.g. SOAP services that pull SAX events over
the network - I can see it now...

Sean

• References:
  • Re: XML should NOT be a new programming language
    • From: Mike Champion <mc@x...>
  • Re: XML should NOT be a new programming language
    • From: "Thomas B. Passin" <tpassin@c...>

• Prev by Date: Re: canonicalization
• Next by Date: Re: canonicalization
• Previous by thread: RE: XML should NOT be a new programming language
• Next by thread: Re: XML should NOT be a new programming language
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread