On Thursday 25 October 2001 15:10, Stephen Adkins wrote: > At 09:43 AM 10/25/2001 +0200, Robin Berjon wrote: > >I'll probably be dropping an RFC for PAXP (the Perl port) here early next > >week. > > I would suggest we not go out of our way to create new "standardized" > API's for things that existing API's already do for us. > (Of course, if you are already scratching an itch, feel free to publish > the new API.)
That's the idea. PAXP (though prolly not under that name) has already been discussed here and there. It's a fairly simple API that allows one to ask for a SAX, DOM, or XSLT parser/implementation/processor without necessarily specifying which one, and without having to deal with the implementation's own interface (which is the same once it has been created, but often different when the constructor is involved). One can also ask for certain configuration options and get an exception when they are not supported (from which you can decide to abort or continue). It will mostly present a single interface to SAX, DOM, and XSLT implementations that already exist. In that, I believe it does scratch an itch (at least, it scratches one of mine). -- _______________________________________________________________________ Robin Berjon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- CTO k n o w s c a p e : // venture knowledge agency www.knowscape.com ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Suicidal twin kills sister by mistake!
