From: Oliver.Kowalke_at_[hidden]
Date: 2007-07-16 02:05:52
Optional class 'comment' wich can occure in arbitrary position- my
thoughts.
Oliver
> My concern, as I indicated in the other thread, is that
> 1)
> <?xml version="1.0"?>
> <article_info isbn="foo">
> <title>bar</title>
> <author>Testy McTest</author>
> </article_info>
>
> 2)
> <?xml version="1.0"?>
> <article_info isbn="foo">
> <!--Title goes here-->
> <title>bar</title>
> <author>Testy McTest</author>
> </article_info>
>
> and 3)
> <?xml <!-- Prolog tag--> version="1.0"?> <article_info isbn="foo">
> <!-- Author goes here -->
> <author>Testy McTest</author>
> <!-- Title goes here -->
> <title>bar</title>
> <!-- Maybe we could add more later--> </article_info>
>
> are all valid XML documents, and represent the same data. If
> this library were solely to be used for writing, I would say
> that this is not an issue.
> However, what is written must be read.
>
> The thing I don't understand about the type-safety proposals
> is how they intend to take into account data that is read
> from a file. Suppose we write a program to neatly display XML
> data from any generic XML file:
>
> boost::xml my_doc_reader(filename);
>
> would certainly be a step, and I would expect it to contain a
> full XML tree after this step is said and done with no extra
> intervention. The XML library certainly can't instantiate the
> proper structs in memory if we don't know what they are. Do
> they exist solely for writing the document?
>
> To me, type safety is a more specific problem than what the
> XML standard deals with. Yet, it is a common enough problem
> to warrant a library solution.
>
> Perhaps:
> public typesafe_xml: public xml
> {
>
> };
>
> that requires you to define the document structure in class
> format, and can throw runtime exceptions when a document is
> read in with the wrong format?
>
> Jake
>
> On 7/13/07, Oliver.Kowalke_at_[hidden]
> <Oliver.Kowalke_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> >
> > > > I would do it over templates - than it's type safe and a
> > > part of the
> > > > xml validation can be done at compile time.
> > > >
> > > > typedef tag<
> > > > mpl::vector< title, author > // tags
> > > > mpl::vector< isbn > // atributes
> > > > > article_info;
> > >
> > >
> > > I hadn't considered compile-time type safety when I wrote
> my above
> > > example.
> > > However, I feel an example like this might also preclude XML
> > > features like comments. If we were to parse an existing article:
> > >
> > > <article_info isbn="foo">
> > > <!--Article information goes here-->
> > > <title>bar</title>
> > > <author>Testy McTest</author>
> > > </article_info>
> > >
> > > your definition doesn't immediately make it clear that
> the comment,
> > > when parsed, ends up in the document tree. I may,
> however, just be
> > > missing something. Complicating matters, according to the
> standard,
> > > they can also appear within the document type declaration, so
> > > comments significantly complicate the matter:
> > > http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml/#sec-prolog-dtd
> > >
> > > And the standard also lists retrieval of comment text as optional:
> > > http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml/#sec-comments
> > >
> > > But I think that a Boost.XML library should support the
> retrieval of
> > > the text of comments.
> >
> > I believe that comments could be supported with a typesafe
> > implementation.
> > I don't know where you see problems with comments -
> article_info could
> > contain optional instances of comment-class.
> >
> > Oliver
> > _______________________________________________
> > Unsubscribe & other changes:
> > http://listarchives.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes:
> http://listarchives.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
>