Chas Emerick wrote: > might be represented as: > > <Element a: head='', text='last'> > <Element b: head='first', text='middle'>
sure, and you could use a text subtype instead that kept track of the elements above it, and let the elements be sequences of their siblings instead of their children, and perhaps stuff everything in a dictionary. such a construct would also be able to hold the same data, and be very hard to use in most normal situations. > If I'm wrong, just chalk it up to the fact that this is the first > time I've ever looked at the Infoset spec, and I'm simply confused. the Infoset spec *is* the essence of XML; if you don't realize that an XML document is just a serialization of a very simple data model, you're bound to be fighting with XML all the time. but ET doesn't implement the Infoset spec as it is, of course: it uses a *simplified* model, carefully optimized for the large percentage of all XML formats that simply doesn't use mixed content. if you're doing document-style processing, you sometimes need to add an extra assignment or two, but unless you're doing *only* document-style processing, ET's API gives you a net win. (and even if you're doing only document-style processing, ET's speed and memory footprint gives you a net win over most competing technologies). </F> -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
