What do you mean by the DOM data model?  Do you mean the data model as
described by the XML Information Set spec?  Or do you mean the DOM's object
model?  The DOM's object model is rather clunky, with a lot of inheritance,
and requires casting and suchforth.  It would be much better implemented as
a set of documented protocols and mixins.

Anyway, *any* standard XML API would be a boon for Rubyists.  Thanks for
everyone making the effort to standardise on this.

Cheers,
            Nat.

________________________________
Dr. Nathaniel Pryce
B13media Ltd.
40-41 Whiskin St, London, EC1R 0BP, UK
http://www.b13media.com

XP Day, London, UK. 15th December 2001. http://xpday.xpdeveloper.com/

----- Original Message -----
From: "Tobias Reif" <tobiasreif / pinkjuice.com>
To: "ruby-talk ML" <ruby-talk / ruby-lang.org>
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 3:54 PM
Subject: [ruby-talk:25019] Re: XML support in the standard lib; what
exactly?


> Nat Pryce wrote:
>
> > The DOM is a pretty awkward API to both use and implement.  An API based
on
> > Ruby-isms, such as dynamic typing and blocks for traversal, and XPath
for
> > lookups would be much more convenient.
>
>
> we agree :)
>
> I talked about DOMs' data model, not the API.
>
> We're talking about an alternative to the DOM API (because it's
> awkward), currently dubbed "RubyWay tree API".
> It could look something like REXMLs' API, including XPath.
>
> This RubyWay tree API could build on the DOM data model (while possibly
> not using a single method of the DOM API), or it could (IMHO preferably)
> build on the Infoset data model.
> The Infoset is created for this task.
>
> Tobi
>
>
>
> --
> Tobias Reif
> http://www.pinkjuice.com/myDigitalProfile.xhtml
>
> go_to('www.ruby-lang.org').get(ruby).play.create.have_fun
> http://www.pinkjuice.com/ruby/
>
>