On Jan 12, 11:53 am, "Chris Mellon" <arka...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 1:32 PM,webcomm<rya...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Jan 9, 7:33 pm, John Machin <sjmac...@lexicon.net> wrote: > >> It is not impossible for a file with dummy data to have been > >> handcrafted or otherwise produced by a process different to that used > >> for a real-data file. > > > I knew it was produced by the same process, or I wouldn't have shared > > it. : ) > > But you couldn't have known that. > > >> > Not sure if you've seen this > >> > thread...http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/browse_thread/thread/... > > >> Yeah, I've seen it ... (sigh) ... pax Steve Holden, but *please* stick > >> with one thread ... > > > Thanks... I thought I was posting about separate issues and would > > annoy people who were only interested in one of the issues if I put > > them both in the same thread. I guess all posts re: the same script > > should go in one thread, even if the questions posed may be unrelated > > and may be separate issues. There are grey areas. > > > Problem solved in John Machin's post at > >http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/browse_thread/thread/... > > It's worth pointing out (although the provider probably doesn't care) > that this isn't really an XML document and this was a bad way of them > to distribute the data. If they'd used a correctly formatted XML > document (with the prelude and everything) with the correct encoding > information, existing XML parsers should have just Done The Right > Thing with the data, instead of you needing to know the encoding a > priori to extract an XML fragment.
Agreed. I can't say I understand their rationale for doing it this way. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list