I'm not familiar with XML-INTO, and I certainly don't know about
handlers. Row-by-row access doesn't make sense to my understanding of
what DOM is. I'm not doubting you at all; I imagine you've done this
yourself already many times.
Now you've confused me. You were talking about SAX being better for selectivity
I did not ever use the word "selectivity" and I am not really sure
what you mean by it. I explained what I understand DOM to be and what
I understand SAX to be. I was talking about SAX for (1) lower memory
requirements than DOM (other than for pathological cases), and (2) the
ability to metaphorically see a progress bar rather than a spinning
hourglass while the parser is doing its thing.
Maybe XML-INTO isn't strictly DOM?
XML-INTO isn't DOM at all. It is basically built on top of XML-SAX.
Well, that's the whole source of the misunderstanding, then. In one of
my earlier messages, I used the phrase
"DOM-style parsing (as exemplified by XML-INTO) needs to work with the
whole file basically as a unit"
Nobody batted an eye at that.
If you look at past discussions on these lists surrounding XML-INTO
vs. XML-SAX, everyone has basically said XML-INTO processes the whole
document at once; and XML-SAX is, obviously, SAX-based. I could have
sworn some people have even said explicitly that XML-INTO was DOM.
I don't use RPG to process XML, so I had no idea that there was this
"XML-INTO with handlers" thing. And outside of RPG, discussions about
XML parsing are always "DOM vs. SAX", so it's only natural to think
that whatever's "not obviously SAX" must surely be DOM. You're saying
that this isn't the case for XML-INTO vs. XML-SAX. OK, great.
I think one reason I often confuse you may be that you think I know
RPG better than I actually do. Which is kind of flattering, actually.
But I'm more like the foreigner who learned enough of the local
language to get around, but not really have deep conversations with.
John Y.
midrange.com
