lxml/ElementTree and .tail
cemerick at snowtide.com
Sun Nov 19 03:56:10 CET 2006
On Nov 18, 2006, at 1:12 PM, Fredrik Lundh wrote:
> Chas Emerick wrote:
>> Further, the fact that ET/lxml works the way that it does makes me
>> think that there may be some other landmines in the underlying model
>> that we might not have discovered until some days, weeks, etc., had
> so the real reason you posted your original post was to spread some
> not to get help? that's a bit disappointing.
Yeah, that's exactly it. In fact, if you look back at the head of
this thread, you'll see how I was looking to disparage ET. I
especially wanted to make sure ET's API doesn't get any traction in
the python community. It's especially important that ET not find
popular success and acclaim -- I'd have quite a bit to gain from it
remaining a niche library.
Fredrik, I wasn't attempting to spread anything. I was confused, I
posed some illustrative examples, and asked for people's thoughts.
Your reply gave me the right vocabulary to find more information
(i.e. about Infoset), and I replied with a overview of what I had
learned so as to benefit anyone with similar questions or confusion
in the future. A discussion ensued.
ET (and lxml) is obviously extremely successful, widely used, and for
good reason. It's just not right for us, but you incorrectly
surmised that I was simply lazy by not modifying/extending ET/lxml to
make it suitable for our purposes even when other libraries existed
that better meshed with our requirements. I tried to answer as
straightforwardly as possible, and (regrettably, it turns out)
included the fact that I had worried that our apparent conceptual
differences indicated that we might find other instances where ET/
lxml works differently than we would expect. I think that's very
rational, and doesn't speak poorly of ET in any way (especially given
its obvious success elsewhere).
More information about the Python-list