ISTR that HTMLParser was the preferred one. It is certainly newer, and doesn't carry the baggage of sgmllib which I would discard together with htmllib). Maybe Fred Drake remembers (he's listed as the co-author on the initial checkin message).
On Feb 20, 2008 2:21 AM, Brett Cannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I started a discussion about creating an html package over on the > stdlib-sig when I realized that htmllib and HTMLParser seem really > similar. Are both modules needed at this point? Otherwise something > like html.parser and html.xparser will be needed to tell them apart in > the package since they both use the same name for the classes they > contain. -- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) _______________________________________________ Web-SIG mailing list Web-SIG@python.org Web SIG: http://www.python.org/sigs/web-sig Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/web-sig/archive%40mail-archive.com
