Java Parser

[David Brownell]

David Megginson wrote:
> 
> David Brownell <david-b at pacbell.net> writes:
> 
> > > Ummmm...I need validation ! So, which one should it be ? TR2 or
> > > XML4J ? Performance is an issue here !
> >
> > Correctness should be too -- see my XML.com review.
> 
> True, but you need to divide the correctness question into two parts:
> 
> a) the parser accepts all well-formed/valid documents
> b) the parser rejects all malformed/invalid documents
>
> A parser that fails either of these is non-conforming; that said, you
> probably care a lot more about (a) than (b) for light-weight clients.

Let's say it's application-dependent.  If the light-weight client
cared enough to validate, presumably it cares a lot about (b) ...
else why bother to validate?

This is an issue I wish I'd highlighted in that review, though it
comes out pretty quickly when you look at the raw testing results.
Oh well, next time -- analysing that much data on a dozen parsers
was no small task!


Did anyone mention size?  Size should be an issue too.  All other
things being equal, smaller means fewer lines for bugs to nest in.

- Dave

xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev at ic.ac.uk
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
unsubscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa at ic.ac.uk)