• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: Does SAX make sense?
• From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
• Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2003 08:33:33 -0400
• In-reply-to: <02d301c30646$b3ddc9c0$4bc8a8c0@A...>

ricko@a... (Rick Jelliffe) writes:
>* have the SAX stream kept cached for the lifetime of the document
>(or have some kind of weak reference perhaps) since they are in memory 
>anyway (though unreachable), allowing backward-looking XPaths; or

That's one of the reasons I created MOE, which uses an event stream
whose events can be easily added to each other to build a tree if
desired.

http://moe.sourceforge.net

MOE should be getting a revision later this year, integrating the
Gorille parser tools and a general refactoring.

I agree with you that there are lots of cases where the SAX approach
seems limited; on the other hand, I still do around 50% of my
programming and processing using SAX, so I definitely find it useful.

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

• References:
  • Does SAX make sense?
    • From: "Rick Jelliffe" <ricko@a...>

• Prev by Date: Re: What is the data here?
• Next by Date: Re: Does SAX make sense?
• Previous by thread: re: Does SAX make sense?
• Next by thread: Re: Does SAX make sense?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread