According to Egon Schmid:
> Gilles Detillieux wrote:
> > > I'm just a casual observer here, but I'd say that if you were going to
> > > standardize on a single parser, your best bet would be XML. You could
> > > probably lift an existing XML parser too. It'd give you a certain
> > > degree of future proofing. (I see on the todo list "Field-based
> > > searching." XML would be a big step in that direction.)
> >
> > Yes, if someone could add a good, efficient and reliable XML parser to
> > htdig, that would certainly be the way to go.
>
> There are some free XML parsers available from James Clark
> http://www.jclark.com/. I don't see any future for meta tags and Dublin
> Core. The concept of structured fields or SGML/XML are very important.
I think when it comes to ht://Dig development, we need to respect the past
as much as we look to the future. All the new developments are great, but
we've been burned a few times before when we adhered too closely to new
standards and broke support for older, non-standard (or loose standard)
documents.
Meta tags may not have much of a future, but there's no denying how heavily
they're used today, nor how many of today's documents will still need to
be parsed and indexed in the future. That means we can't drop meta tag
support, and if enough people still want it, it may still be a good idea
to extend that support to include Dublin Core.
--
Gilles R. Detillieux E-mail: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Spinal Cord Research Centre WWW: http://www.scrc.umanitoba.ca/~grdetil
Dept. Physiology, U. of Manitoba Phone: (204)789-3766
Winnipeg, MB R3E 3J7 (Canada) Fax: (204)789-3930
------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the htdig3-dev mailing list, send a message to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
You'll receive a message confirming the unsubscription.
