I understand that there is no law that forbids some ways of XML parsing. :) My question is in another plain. Perhaps some other languages have the same realization? I am trying to understated what purpose it serves? Does this done intentionally, or this is just random side effect?
For example this particular thing hit me when I tried to use (se-path*) and (se-path*/list), because this quotes just trowed in plain list with the text, lets say I can filter them, but how I must solve this if there will be such quotes inside the text? Yes, they are equivalent by this particular parser/format design, but they are semantically distinct by reality. As well as escape strings from other characters. I am trying to understated why this particular semantic distinction is taken into account. I am trying to understand why xml lib makes this semantic distinction when format does not defines such thing. > > But AFAIK there is nothing in the XML spec that requires XML to be parsed > in your preferred style. So it is not "wrong behavior". > > Moreover, if you are writing code that treats '(tag "a" "b") and '(tag > "ab") as semantically distinct, that's a code smell, because as XML, > they're equivalent: > > #lang racket > (require xml rackunit) > (check-equal? "<tag>ab</tag>" (xexpr->string '(tag "a" "b"))) > (check-equal? "<tag>ab</tag>" (xexpr->string '(tag "ab"))) > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Racket Users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to racket-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/racket-users/df1e76f4-6459-4c12-b85e-f36c2d4bd13c%40googlegroups.com.
