I think it would be useful if you could post the reparser stuff.
I think it would be really cool if we could parse the xml in a lazy fashion
so that the entire tree might not come into memory at once.
i.e.
let x=parse xml
in
(y,z)=processXml(someAlgebra,x)
like the circular rep-min problem. I do not know if this will be viable
with the combinator libraries. I am still working on my xpath parser.
This might be of interest to you. http://www.w3.org/Math/
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Theodore Norvell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, September 25, 2000 10:56 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: combinator parser and XSLT
>
>
>
> Doug:
>
> Thanks for your reply.
>
> I think I have a similar problem to yours. XML only provides the
> skeleton of the language but there are structural aspects that the XML
> tags do not express. The language I'm parsing is essentially
> a language of mathematical expressions, so you might see
>
> a+<fraction><denominator>c+d</denominator>
> <numerator>e+f</numerator>
> </fraction>+g
>
> The way I'm doing this is to use XMLLib's parser to create a tree
> (a "document object") and then using a parsing monad to
> "reparse" the tree
> of strings into a full abstract syntax tree. Since most
> combinator parser
> systems and monadic parser systems expect their inputs to be
> strings rather
> than lists of trees, I had to write my own Monad; but that
> wasn't so hard. For
> example, there is a combinator
> (<?>) :: String -> (Reparser a) -> (Reparser a)
> which can be used thusly:
>
> parseFraction = -- Succeeds only if the next content item is a
> -- well formed fraction element.
> "fraction" <?> (do d <- parseDenominator
> n <- parseNumerator
> endP -- ensure no spurious content
> in the element
> return (Fraction d n) )
>
> I'd be happy to send you the reparsing monad, if you like. I wrote it
> a while ago, so it may not be compatible with the latest version
> of XMLLib (HaXml?). Unlike Daan and Manual, I'm unable to
> claim that it is
> adequately documented or efficient.
>
> To answer Chris's question. One could easily use this reparsing
> monad to flatten the tree into a sequence of SAX tokens. How lazy it
> would be depend on the underlying XML parser.
>
> Cheers,
> Theodore Norvell
>
> ----------------------------
> Dr. Theodore Norvell
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Electrical and Computer Engineering
> http://www.engr.mun.ca/~theo
> Engineering and Applied Science Phone:
> (709) 737-8962
> Memorial University of Newfoundland Fax:
> (709) 737-4042
> St. John's, NF, Canada, A1B 3X5
>
