[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: DOM or SAX: Sense and Sensibility
PaulT wrote: > > My prediction is that the era of low-level > lexer ( called SAX ) and low-level model > ( called DOM) is over and there will be > soon more high-level bindings on top > of these low-level APIs (or not on top of them). > > I think that asking developers to write all the code > in terms of SAX or DOM APIs is like asking > them to write programms in assembly language. I agree; whenever I use the DOM API the very first thing I do is to write a wrapper around it to make it more palatable. This is why I do most of my XML processing in Tcl, since linguistic extension is one of it's strong points. This: element "DIV" { element "H2" { text "Title" } } is infinitely preferable to this: set n1 [dom::document createElement $doc DIV] set n2 [dom::document createElement $doc H2] set n3 [dom::document createTextNode $doc "Title" dom::node appendChild $doc $n1 dom::node appendChild $n1 $n2 dom::node appendChild $n2 $n3 > [1] http://www.pault.com/pault/pxml/nxml.html > [2] Here are two other Brutal XML Bindings > http://web.co.nz/~grantm/cpan/index.html > http://www.zope.org/Members/haqa/XMLKit > > I appreciate more URLs for brital XML bindings, > seems not easy to find them ... Well, there's always the tried and true toolkits from the SGML world like Balise [1], Omnimark [2], and Cost [3] (the latter is a Tcl extension, the first two contain their own programming languages). Does XSLT count? Another good one is HaXml [4], the Haskell XML toolkit. --Joe English jenglish@f... [1-4]: <URL: http://www.google.com/ >
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|