[XML-SIG] DOM: Multiple proxy problem

Greg Stein gstein@lyra.org
Tue, 6 Oct 1998 15:33:02 -0700

I think it is reasonable to assume that if an application is interested in
the details of white space and comments, then it can directly use a parser
rather than DOM. I'd posit that most applications that are interested in the
XML structure/content are interested in DOM but not in the whitespace (and
other syntactic cruft). Conversely, applications that are interested in raw
XML processing wouldn't be interested in the DOM representation, yet the
whitespace and other cruft are relevant.  YMMV.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: xml-sig-admin@python.org [mailto:xml-sig-admin@python.org]On
> Behalf Of Fred L. Drake
> Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 1998 2:22 PM
> To: Andrew M. Kuchling
> Cc: xml-sig@python.org
> Subject: Re: [XML-SIG] DOM: Multiple proxy problem
> Andrew M. Kuchling writes:
>  > 	The DOM spec doesn't actually mention ignorable whitespace,
>  > presumably because the spec is concerned with navigating over an
>   As we discussed, I'm remembering from an older draft of the DOM,
> which included an attribute called something like
> isIgnorableWhitespace.  I still think it's a good idea, but
> appearantly there were problems with it.  It would most certainly be
> useful.
>  > But SAX loses some information, such as comments, so it can't be a
>  > general solution.  You'd want parser-to-DOM drivers for PyExpat,
>   As does DOM, based on the same discussion.  I don't have any problem
> with additional interfaces on the Python DOM objects that allow
> checking for things like ignorable white space, though, as long as
> reasonable behaviors are defined for operations such as reparenting.
>   -Fred
> --
> Fred L. Drake, Jr.	     <fdrake@acm.org>
> Corporation for National Research Initiatives
> 1895 Preston White Dr.	    Reston, VA  20191
> _______________________________________________
> XML-SIG maillist  -  XML-SIG@python.org
> http://www.python.org/mailman/listinfo/xml-sig