On Sun, 17 Jun 2007 10:18:29 -0400 Daniel Veillard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > So, what do you think? Is this something the libxml2 project > > would like to see, or would you prefer to steer well clear? > > I'm not adverse to adding a new HTML parsing option for 'tag soup' > but you would have to define clearly what is the new parsing strategy > before I (and others on this list) can say yes or no to that option. > So what would the 'tag soup' parser do that the current HTML parser > does not and vice-versa ? If you could define this other than by an > accumulation of specific cases then that's probably viable, but if > it's just an ever growing list of individual preferences on a case > by case basis, this doesn't sound okay to say yes to your selection > rather than someone else application own set. > Makes sense ? Thanks for the quick response. Yes, of course I didn't expect a straight "yes" to such a vague proposal. My question concerned whether I should invest the time and effort to determine the details of how this should look in the context of HTMLparser. I'll take your reply as a yes in principle, and dive into the code to think it through a little more. If it looks promising, I'll come back to you with more concrete proposals. -- Nick Kew Application Development with Apache - the Apache Modules Book http://www.apachetutor.org/ _______________________________________________ xml mailing list, project page http://xmlsoft.org/ [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/xml
