Hi Jesse, Jesse Pelton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I don't know whether there's a good way to carve off sections of the > library, but I'm pretty sure the DOM parser is built on SAX, so removing > SAX would be an option only if you don't need to parse. To be more precise, both SAX and DOM parsers are built on top of a low-level, SAX-like parser. As a result, SAX implementation is quite thin so removing it won't give you much. XML Schema support, on the other hand, can result in a more significant gain though it could also be significantly more complicated to remove. While there are implementations of XML scanners (that's where XML Schema and DTD validation happens) that don't depend on XML Schema support (e.g., DGXMLScanner and WFXMLScanner), there is also such a thing as DOM type information which allows you to query XML Schema grammar corresponding to the parsed DOM nodes. Overall, I think it shouldn't be too difficult to get rid of XML Schema support if you don't mind making some source code changes. Boris -- Boris Kolpackov, Code Synthesis Tools http://codesynthesis.com/~boris/blog Open source XML data binding for C++: http://codesynthesis.com/products/xsd Mobile/embedded validating XML parsing: http://codesynthesis.com/products/xsde --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
