From: Daniel Wesslén (daniel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-04-24 08:02:06
Thorsten Ottosen wrote:
> Daniel Wesslén wrote:
>> Vladimir Prus wrote:
>>> It would be pretty bad if Boost has property_tree that reads "simple" XML
>>> *and* another XML library, with different interface that has full support
>>> for XML. How am I to choose one or another library?
>> When boost gets a full XML library then the property_tree XML parser
>> could (should, IMO) be replaced with a wrapper over that one. What's the
> There is no need for that. As long as the scope of the xml-parser for
> a property tree is well-defined wrt. what subset of xml it can handle,
> the user is free to choose.
> It is not obvious how more advanced xml-features should map to a
> property-tree, and it is quite thinkable that it does not make much
> sense to use those together.
Schema validation, XInclude and encodings could be transparently
supported. Sure, some advanced features wouldn't map neatly to a
property_tree, but that is no reason to rule out support for those that do.
-- Daniel Wesslén
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk