[email protected] writes: > what about having mwlib use the mw's api parse parameter to retrieve a parse > tree from a page? > > why would this project insist on being its own parser, you will struggle to > keep up with the features offered by > the mw native parser as well as cause more headaches when it comes to > supporting extensions that are already > working with the native parser? it would seem to me from a features > standpoint you would simply parse the output of > a printable page output or the simple html output that comes from the mw api.
This project doesn't insist on being its own parser. It did make sense to write our own parser when we started. > > On Nov 18, 2009 4:25am, Ralf Schmitt <[email protected]> wrote: >> Gero [email protected]> writes: >> >> >> >> >> >> > I think that the expansion of the DPL tag (parser function and parser >> >> Something is very wrong with your email clients quoting. And while I'm here: A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "mwlib" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/mwlib?hl=.
