Re: [xml] Re: XML libs (was Re: gconf backend)

[Havoc Pennington <hp redhat com>]

On Sun, 2003-09-28 at 17:36, Daniel Veillard wrote:
>   Yes there is a difference, the fact that libxml2 and expat actually
> fully understand teh XML spec means that they will act appropriately 
> when parsing DTDs or when processing the HTML and generating the
> data to the user space.

No no no no. I am talking about _API_. You are talking about
_implementation_ of current gmarkup. Go back and re-read my mail.
I understand your point about the gmarkup implementation and agree with
it. 

>   Make a glue layer on top of the parser

That's what I'm talking about. I've already written such a layer in dbus
daemon for example. I am just saying it can be in a library. There's no
reason it has to be in the app. I'm also saying that an API similar to
the current gmarkup _API_  would be a workable interface (NOT
implementation) for such a glue layer.

It may well make sense in a library, since I have at least 4 things I've
written that would use it. But the first thing to establish is that
there's no matter of principle that forbids such a subsetting glue
library. Or at least, that any such principle would also forbid
_applications_ from understanding only a subset of XML.

Havoc