On Tue, 2001-11-13 at 22:56, James Britt (rubydev) wrote:
> OK, let me rephrase that: many people lured to Ruby by the mention of XML will likley expect a DOM API.  Certainly, if you're
> looking to *write* an XML API Ruby is quite good, though the absence of Unicode support is a problem.

People coming from Java may expect DOM, but even Java has JDOM and
DOM4J.  Perl's implementations are all over the map, and Python
certainly has variety.  I don't think there's anything especially
magical about DOM that demands a DOM implementation have high priority.

> > A variety of issues - especially Unicode support - drove me back to
> > Java, where I'm merrily creating my own API for working with XML.  The
> > DOM itself is hardly my favorite API.  I'd have been a lot happier with
> > Ruby if it had a friendly API for manipulating XML, DOM or not.
> 
> Was REXML available when you first looked at Ruby?

No, it wasn't.  I haven't had a chance to look at REXML closely, but
REXML is the main reason I've stayed subscribed to this list.
 
-- 
Simon St.Laurent
"Every day, in every way, I'm getting better and better." - Emile Coue