[XML-SIG] Minidom bugs/questions
Sun, 04 Feb 2001 23:29:08 -0700
> Uche Ogbuji wrote:
> > > The original idea of minidom was that it should be "minimal"; clearly
> > > that has not worked out, so we probably should review it carefully to
> > > achieve completeness (with respect to "DOM 2 Core").
> > Well, we should think about exactly what makes minidom "mini". It's debatable
> > whether it is possible to implement all of DOM Level 2 core and still be
> > "mini". And what about DOm level 3?
> I think we should also look at merging minidom and pDomlette. Both are
> supposed to be "mini" and I think they both support about the same sets
> of functionality. No sense keeping both of them around. I can look at
> the differences and try to merge them.
Before you start doing this, I think we need to really air the matter out. It
wouldn't normally be such a big deal except for the special status of minidom
(as the default Python DOM).
My sentiments are in favor of the idea. Probably the biggest issues would be
the DOM extension interfaces, e.g. PrettyPrint vs. toXML. Of course DOM Level
3 should settle that.
This would be a very opportune time for Paul Prescod to make a re-appearance.
Uche Ogbuji Principal Consultant
email@example.com +1 303 583 9900 x 101
Fourthought, Inc. http://Fourthought.com
4735 East Walnut St, Ste. C, Boulder, CO 80301-2537, USA
Software-engineering, knowledge-management, XML, CORBA, Linux, Python