The following came up on xml-dev. It's relevant to the discussions we've had in the past on SAX parsing alternatives (and somewhat academically interesting as well :-)
In particular, note the performance comparisons with Xalan... Peter Hunsberger -----Original Message----- From: Patrick Durusau [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2003 6:27 AM To: zhengyu Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [xml-dev] Does SAX make sense? Jimmy, Another paper that you may find interesting is: An Algorithm from Streaming XPath Processing with Forward and Backward Axes, www.cs.nyu.edu/~deepak/publications/icde.pdf. Note that this technique has been applied to documents over 1 GB in size. Patrick zhengyu wrote: >I have got a weird question in mind that I would like to toss it out. > >Suppose there is a way to offer DOM type interface with SAX kind of >efficiency. How long would it take for the new processing model to >become really popular? > >Jimmy >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Karl Waclawek" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Sent: Sunday, May 25, 2003 7:00 PM >Subject: Re: [xml-dev] Does SAX make sense? > >>>There are several implementations, but I don't know of any standard >>>interface. I have been thinking that having a standard interface just >>>for passing XPath expressions to an event parser would be great. >>>Anyone know of a standard being worked, implementations, or >>>interested in starting a working group? If so, I'm in. >>> >>> >>I am working on something similar, but much simpler right now. My >>XPaths are just straight paths, or in other words, element types. >> >>My initial plan was to build a DTD (or other schema) validator (on top >>of SAX) which has callback hooks for custom validation or processing. >>The callbacks are registered by the application based on a path - but >>rather a path based on the schema object model and not the document >>object model. Every node in the SOM corresponds to a separate set of >>callbacks. >> >>So far I was not thinking of anything more complex, as I think this >>would be quite an effort. >> >>Karl >>
