Re: Regression results as XML?

From: williamkempf_at_[hidden]
Date: 2001-09-25 08:01:04

--- In boost_at_y..., Marshall Clow <marshall_at_i...> wrote:
> At 12:33 PM +1000 9/25/01, Fisher; Damien Kaine wrote:
> >On Mon, 24 Sep 2001, Daryle Walker wrote:
> >
> >> on 9/24/01 7:29 PM, Jens Maurer at Jens.Maurer_at_g... wrote:
> >>
> >> > Damien Fisher wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> Well...why isn't there an XML parser in boost?
> >> >
> >> > Because nobody has written one and offered it for inclusion
> >> > into boost.  Feel free to do so.
> >>
> >> I was just thinking about this right before reading this 
message.  I heard
> >> that XML was supposed to be designed so a CS student could write 
a parser
> >> within a week.  (I guess this means just enough to check for 
well-formed
> >> files, and not validation nor all the whiz-bang stuff like XSL, 
XPath,
> >> Schema, XQuery, etc.)
> >>
> >> Let me think about this a little more....
> >
> >I disagree.
> >
> >Parsing a simple XML document is easy, and your right, a CS 
student could
> >do it.
> >
> >But, as with all W3C specs, doing the whole thing is a little bit
> >messier.  Maybe a 3rd year CS student's level :).
> >
> >The main problem is not that the coding is difficult - it is not.  
But I
> >have never come across an XML parser whose interface I was really 
happy
> >with.  They are all a little messy.
> >
> >The other thing is the "extra" stuff production XML parsers really 
have to
> >include - XSLT transforms, etc.  And these have to be pretty high
> >performance.
> >
> >I have done a lot of work with this stuff and I would be quite 
interested
> >in contributing to this if it goes ahead.
> 
> I would be interested as well.
> 
> Let's start with a description of the interface that people would 
like to see.
> Let's nail that down first.
> 
> P.S.	After saying that, I have to point out that I will be 
unavailable from
> now until next Monday. ;-) I'll be happy to participate then.

No matter how ugly you think the interface is, any successful parser 
is going to have to include the interfaces for the two current 
standard interfaces: DOM and SAX.  Including a third interface that's 
easier to deal with for simple chores may be a great idea, but we 
really do need the standards.

Bill Kempf