[XML-SIG] PyXML for py 2.5
hgg9140 at seanet.com
Sun Feb 24 17:21:13 CET 2008
On Sun, 24 Feb 2008 11:05:34 +0100
"Martin v. Löwis" <martin at v.loewis.de> wrote:
> >> If you have an application that is entirely about XML
> >> processing, use Java.
> Sure, if your processing needs are simple, the Python implementation
> will be simple, and perhaps also reasonably performant. However,
> in an application that is all about XML processing, chances are high
> that you need a functionality that is not available in the XML library
> of your choice, but would be available in Java.
This completely misses the point of XML. Its purpose is to provide a
cross-platform, cross-language lingua franca everyone can use. As for
complexity, the original permise was to be simple enough that
a grad student can write a parser in a weekend. At bit more
complexity is acceptable, as long as standards-approved complexity isn't
used as a lockin mechanism.
The fact that this promise scared the crap out of COTS vendors who then
"embraced, enhanced, extended" XML into a bloated stds-based
lockin monster is no excuse to surrender. Use a reasonably
well-supported (on all platforms and languages) subset of XML. Use the
If you find there is XML which is truely unparseable with cross-language
tools, then isolate it, translate it to reusable XML, and go from
there. (And tell the supplier you are examining other options.)
I've had to do this with "XML" data feeds from Microsoft, IBM, and
Dassault Systemes products. Java wouldn't have helped. Further, when
we've done Java and Python systems in parallel (e.g., in SOAP/SSL
communications), python was by far the easiest, cleanest treatment.
hgg9140 at seanet.com www.seanet.com/~hgg9140
More information about the XML-SIG