On Monday, 12 February 2018 at 16:50:16 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
Folks are free to decide to support dxml for inclusion when the
time comes and free to vote it as unacceptable. Personally, I
think that dxml's approach is ideal for XML that doesn't use
entity references, and I'd much rather use that kind of parser
regardless of whether it's in the standard library or not. I
think that the D community would be far better off with std.xml
being replaced by dxml, but whatever happens happens.
Bump!
I'm using dxml now, and it's a very good library. So I thought
"it should be in Phobos instead of std.xml" and searched the
newsgroup. Sorry for necroposting. Anyway, what I wanted to say
is just take an example from Perl and call it std.xml.simple.
Then people would know what to expect from it and would use it
(because everyone likes simple). That would also leave a way to
include std.xml.full (or some such) at some indefinite point in
the future. Which is, in practice, probably never - and that's
fine, because who needs DTD? screw it...
Anyway, thanks for the library, Jonathan.
