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

Re: funny parser

• To: Dirk Huenniger <hunniger@c...>
• Subject: Re: funny parser
• From: Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@e...>
• Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 18:03:17 +0200
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <434A8E24.6080905@c...>
• References: <434A720C.6020106@c...> <a0611040dbf7025eb20da@[192.168.0.0]> <434A7A27.8070406@e...> <434A8E24.6080905@c...>
• User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.6 (Macintosh/20050716)

Dirk Huenniger wrote:
> Robin Berjon wrote:
>>Yes, that or an XPath should work quite well. It's routinely done in a
>>variety of situations. You may wish to look at XUpdate for instance
>>(assuming you want to reuse an existing piece of technology).
> 
> I just took a look at XUpdate. And it seems to be OK, but I need some
> funny callbacks on the client side.
> And they are very important for my project. And I did not find them in
> XUpdate.

If XUpdate doesn't do what you need, don't use it. I was pointing to it 
because it solves quite a few update use cases and they've already done 
the job of documenting it, but don't try to shoe-horn it into your 
solution if it doesn't fit, that wouldn't buy you anything.

-- 
Robin Berjon
   Senior Research Scientist
   Expway, http://expway.com/

• References:
  • funny parser
    • From: Dirk Huenniger <hunniger@c...>
  • Re: funny parser
    • From: "Steven J. DeRose" <sderose@a...>
  • Re: funny parser
    • From: Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@e...>
  • Re: funny parser
    • From: Dirk Huenniger <hunniger@c...>

• Prev by Date: Re: [Summary] Better design: "flatter is better" or
• Next by Date: RE: [Summary] Better design: "flatter is better" or "nesting is better" ?
• Previous by thread: Re: funny parser
• Next by thread: RE: funny parser
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread