I'll take a crack at the comparison doc.  Sounds like an useful
reference to have around when choosing your tools.

-Peter


Peter Seibel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> On Jan 15, 2006, at 11:08 PM, Tim Cross wrote:
>
>> I thought I'd point out an alternative package which may already
>> support other language encodings - the package is called s-xml (in
>> Debian it is cl-s-xml).
>
> So, while Keith may have decided that cxml is the XML parser that  
> best suits his needs, it would still be a *great* Gardening project  
> for someone to write up a web page on the ALU Wiki explaining the  
> differences between the different XML libraries. It may be that they  
> all have different strengths and weaknesses and its good that there  
> are several different ones in which case the right gardening thing to  
> do is to provide the information people need to decide which one is  
> right for their needs. Or it may be that there's one that's far  
> enough ahead of the others that the garden would be improved by doing  
> a bit of work to help it achieve total world domination. But the  
> first step is for someone to write that comparison. Anyone?
>
> -Peter
>
> -- 
> Peter Seibel           * [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Gigamonkeys Consulting * http://www.gigamonkeys.com/
> Practical Common Lisp  * http://www.gigamonkeys.com/book/

-- 
B 01110011 01100001 01101001 01101110 01110100
----------------------------------------------
Managing Member @ CORENOVA,LLC. M:562-405-5470
- let them be, just evolve.     O:562-405-5470
----------------------------------------------
56 69 73 69 74  75 73  61 74: www.corenova.com

CORENOVA> ./freedom. intoxicating. <RET>
_______________________________________________
Gardeners mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.lispniks.com/mailman/listinfo/gardeners

Reply via email to