From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3 X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.105]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48598BBAF for ; Thu, 18 Sep 2008 11:44:10 +0200 (CEST) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApoEAPu/0UjUVZsV/2dsb2JhbAC5X4Fn X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.32,420,1217800800"; d="scan'208";a="29319532" Received: from cerberus.snarc.org ([212.85.155.21]) by mail4-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 18 Sep 2008 11:44:09 +0200 Received: by cerberus.snarc.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 198FC129EC; Thu, 18 Sep 2008 10:44:22 +0100 (BST) Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2008 10:44:23 +0100 From: Vincent Hanquez To: Till Varoquaux Cc: Dario Teixeira , caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] XML library for validating MathML Message-ID: <20080918094423.GA15508@snarc.org> References: <103293.54569.qm@web54606.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <20080918083853.GA15219@snarc.org> <9d3ec8300809180212r7e3dcdf3wd13c5cff69d5034b@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <9d3ec8300809180212r7e3dcdf3wd13c5cff69d5034b@mail.gmail.com> X-Warning: Email may contain unsmilyfied humor and/or satire. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-Spam: no; 0.00; 0100,:01 pxp:01 parsers:01 ocaml:01 pxp:01 expat:98 engineered:98 engineered:98 wrote:01 parsing:01 caml-list:01 parse:02 confusing:02 library:03 thu:05 On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 10:12:26AM +0100, Till Varoquaux wrote: > PXP is tough to work with and feels a bit crazy but it is good with > standards (It can sort out any DTD's I have ever thrown at it). > xml-light is, well, very broken (it doesn't even support charcode > switching). There are several XML parsers in OCaml and I've had a > stint with a few of them; the only two I would consider using are > expat and Pxp with a marked preference for the later. PXP can be very > confusing and feels over engineered at times but it does the job. it's over engineered .. just like the XML spec :) I don't do DTD validation, and i had great success with xmlm which is _much_ better in term of XML compliance. > And > remember parsing XML is a hard job, much harder than we often give it > credit for.... I certainly agree. it's hard, and also slow to parse. i tends to prefer alternative formats nowadays. -- Vincent