steve wrote: > I had sent this question below a couple of months ago but didn't receive > any replies. I forgot about it though, since I had moved on to using > BeautifulSoup. Now however, I am wondering why something like this is > not present in the standard lib. What is the accepted procedure to > propose the inclusion of some module in our beloved 'batteries included' > library ? > > I'd like to see this module (or something similar) included.
This has been proposed and discussed before and was rejected, IIRC, mainly due to the lack of a maintainer. But there are also other reasons. For stdlib inclusion, it's generally required for a module/package to be best-of-breed. So, why BS instead of html5lib, which, supposedly, is a lot more 'future proof' than BS. Or lxml, which is a lot faster and more memory friendly? Or maybe others? See, for example, the python-dev archives from 2009-03-02. Stefan -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
