From: Sean Russell <ser@...>
Date: 2002-02-03T07:55:55+09:00
Subject: Re: Ruby + XML Proposal

Hi David.

David Alan Black wrote:
> Again, I'm inclined to think that trying to distribute an interface
> that isn't the authors' interface across many packages (i.e.,
> integrated into those packages) probably won't achieve the consistency
> you're looking for, especially since we don't know what the future
> will bring.  I can see that SAX may not be everyone's idea of an
> appropriate interface for Ruby and other non-Java languages (or even
> Java), but I'm not sure that per-programming-language standards in
> something like this, where the standard ultimately is external to the
> language, is viable.
> 
> Or am I just being pessimistic? short-sighted? whatever?

No, I think you hit the nail on the head.

On the one hand, we have a standardized API, to which all XML parser 
authors should adhere.  This is admirable, and I've been advocating it WRT 
GUI APIs (more or less).  On the other hand, I recognize that these 
standardized APIs generally suck.  I will not change the REXML API to 
conform to DOM, for example.  I suffered through DOM long enough in Java, 
and the primary reason, perhaps the only reason, I wrote REXML was so that 
I would have access to an intuitive XML API.  (Aside: I wrote REXML for 
myself.  Lately, I'm mostly writing it for other people, it seems.  Oh 
well.)

-- 
--- SER