Re: [xml-dev] To tree, or not to tree ...(was Re: [xml-dev] The subsetting has begun)

From
Simon St.Laurent <>
To
XML Dev <>
Date
2003-03-01T16:12:48Z
ID
<r01050400-1024-A561CD924C0011D79B260003937A08C2@[192.168.124.11]>
Thread
Re: [xml-dev] To tree, or not to tree ...(was Re: [xml-dev] The subsetting has begun)
 (Mike Champion) writes:
>>> You claimed that a parser *has* to model the XML instance as a tree.
>>> DOM-type parsers do, but SAX-type parsers just don't.
>>
>> No, I didn't. But I can see the tree from the maps :)
>
>Ooooh, this is getting into deep philosophical territory ... "If a
>tree grows from the SAX forest but there is no one there to see it, is
>it still a 'tree'????"  <grin>

Sometimes I want to treat it as a tree, sometimes I don't.  As long as
no one tells me that it must be a tree, I don't really care.  Seems
easier that way.

-- 
Simon St.Laurent
Ring around the content, a pocket full of brackets
Errors, errors, all fall down!
http://simonstl.com -- http://monasticxml.org