On 12/02/2018 3:59 PM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
If std.xml currently does not support DTDs, then I say dxml is definitely a Phobos candidate. At the very least, it does not make the current situation worse. Rejecting dxml because it doesn't support DTDs is basically letting the perfect be the enemy of the good, which is something this community has been plagued with for far too long. What's worse: a std.dxml that doesn't support DTDs, or a std.xml with fundamental problems that continue to plague us for the next decade while nobody else steps up to implement a suitable replacement?
dxml 7.5k LOC std.xml 3k LOC dxml would make the situation a lot worse.
