Paul Prescod wrote:
>
> We have three options:
>
> 1. use the relatively large 4XPath as is
>
> 2. use a tiny subset of XPath (analogous SQL with only simple SELECT)
> that can be implemented in a couple of hundred lines of Python code
> (this code is mostly done already, in a module called TinyXPath)
>
> 3. try to scale 4XPath back by moving its parser to SRE, and making
> some of its features "options" that can be added separately (not clear
> how easy this is)
>
> What do you think?
Well, I think that the code you're talking about fits best the 4Suite
and, for the moment, as a user I would download and install the whole suite
from FourThought.
You're talking about XPath, but there are also XLink, XPointer, XML Base
and other incoming X'es. What's the motivation behind decoupling 4XPath
from the 4Suite and making a second (eventually smaller) version of it
for the Python lib?
I don't really see the point (note: I haven't followed the XML-SIG lately).
I'd like to see this discussion focusing on more ambitious goals, like
including and providing support for a complete, rich and up to date XML
package, which is what the 4Suite basically is. I'm not sure we're ready
to discuss this right now, though, so I'd suggest to PEP it anyway.
--
Vladimir MARANGOZOV | Vladimir.Marangozov@inrialpes.fr
http://sirac.inrialpes.fr/~marangoz | tel:(+33-4)76615277 fax:76615252
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4