On Monday, 12 February 2018 at 15:43:59 UTC, bachmeier wrote:
On Monday, 12 February 2018 at 14:04:38 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
However, if folks as a whole think that Phobos' xml parser
needs to support the DTD section to be acceptable, then dxml
won't replace std.xml, because dxml is not going to implement
DTD support. DTD support fundamentally does not fit in with
dxml's design.
Can't you simply give it a name other than std.xml that
indicates it doesn't do everything related to xml? It doesn't
make sense to not put it into Phobos because of the name, and
that should be an easy problem to solve.
Hit send too fast. std.xml.base would be reasonable.
