[XML-SIG] a package for minidom
Fred L. Drake, Jr.
Wed, 20 Feb 2002 18:13:18 -0500
Martin v. Loewis writes:
> Is that the only rationale? I fear overstructuring, and I'd like to
> avoid increasing the number of package names that users need to be
> aware of.
Actually, I'd expect users to continue using one of the
getDOMImplementation() functions, or just xml.dom.minidom.parse*().
> I'd put those in xml.dom.expatreader, or some such, parallel to
> xml.sax.expatreader. I certainly hope that the expatbuilder goes into
> Python proper eventually,
This is my hope and intention.
> and I see no point in draining xml.dom to a
> single mini subpackage in Python core.
I consider this a minor detail; it doesn't bother me.
> Having thirty some modules in xml.dom does not scare me; Python's Lib
> directory has roughly 170 modules in a single directly, yet nobody is
Er, actually, an ever-increasing number of people seem to dislike the
current situation, and would like to see the standard library
"packagized". I certainly find it annoying to have so much stuff in
the global module namespace, including many modules which are simply
In the interest of getting on with it, I'll concede. In the long run,
There Can Be Only One, so it's OK if it takes a while. ;-)
Fred L. Drake, Jr. <fdrake at acm.org>
PythonLabs at Zope Corporation