RE: [xml] libxml3 Tree API

["Hundiak, Arthur" <ahundiak ingr com>]

I'll look at the xpath code in detail.  I don't think we need to change the existing tree structure to make 
this work.  

-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel Veillard [mailto:veillard redhat com]
Sent: Friday, April 19, 2002 9:18 AM
To: Hundiak, Arthur
Cc: 'xml gnome org'
Subject: Re: [xml] libxml3 Tree API


On Fri, Apr 19, 2002 at 09:05:22AM -0500, Hundiak, Arthur wrote:
> If I understand correctly, then an abstract tree api is exactly what we need.  The existing tree is 
> fantastic but is overkill for my applications.  But I need to use it for xpath/xslt.
>
> I know there would be an overhead to using an abstract interface since you could no longer access member 
> variables directly, on the other hand not needing to access member variables directly means the structures 
> can be taken private and changed without breaking things.
>
> I'd be very willing to assist in this effort.

  Well changing the representation of the tree break both the API and ABI.
Seems the people from Xalan are going though this ATM and I have heard
some unhappy fellows about this.

  Breaking the representation means this would have to be a libxml3 effort.
I'm not saying this shouldn't be done, I actually presented this possibility
  http://veillard.com/Talks/2002Guadec/slide9-0.html

but it's a very significant work. I'm currently stuck with XML Schemas,
and it's gonna take some time ! That doesn't mean people interested in
evolution should not start seriously putting black on white what's needed
it just mean I can't focuse myself on this ATM.

Daniel

-- 
Daniel Veillard      | Red Hat Network https://rhn.redhat.com/
veillard redhat com  | libxml GNOME XML XSLT toolkit  http://xmlsoft.org/
http://veillard.com/ | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/