Re: A thought on implementation...

• Mail folder: WWW Talk Jan 94-present
• Next message: Erik Naggum: "Re: A thought on implementation..."
• Previous message: Daniel W. Connolly: "Re: HTML/EML implementation "
• Maybe in reply to: Erik Naggum: "Re: A thought on implementation..."
• Reply: Erik Naggum: "Re: A thought on implementation..."

Errors-To: listmaster@www0.cern.ch
Date: Thu, 17 Feb 1994 17:29:47 --100
Message-id: <9402171625.AA15193@xcf.Berkeley.EDU>
Errors-To: listmaster@www0.cern.ch
Reply-To: wei@xcf.Berkeley.EDU
Originator: www-talk@info.cern.ch
Sender: www-talk@www0.cern.ch
Precedence: bulk
From: wei@xcf.Berkeley.EDU (Pei Y. Wei)
To: Multiple recipients of list <www-talk@www0.cern.ch>
Subject: Re: A thought on implementation...
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
Content-Length: 660

Erik Naggum wrote:
> Rather than
> roll your own primitive and dysfunctional SGML processors, why not use an
> actual SGML parser?  Some of them are heavy-weights, and some insist on
> being run as separate processes, but the project I'm working on has shown
> that one can build a small and conforming SGML parser that is also fast.

Interesting. Does this small+conforming+fast SGML parser exist, and is
it going to be freely available on the net?

BTW, If anyone has succeeded in, or would like to try, making sgmls into 
a linkable library (as opposed to being run restarting the process), 
please drop me a line. I tried it once but it wasn't fun.


-Pei