Re: [libxml++] Re: Libxmlplusplus-general digest, Vol 1 #293 - 1 msg

[Christophe de V. <cde...@al...>]

Stefan Seefeld a écrit :

> Daniel Veillard wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Aug 16, 2004 at 11:07:43AM -0400, Kurt M. Brown wrote:
>>
>>> I agree that a generic C++ API for xml would be useful; one the closely
>>> matches: http://www.w3.org/DOM/.
>>
>>   which totally sucks because it mandates UTF-16 strings.
>> There is a good reason I didn't tried to implement "real" DOM in
>> libxml2, I woudn't have been conformant anyway because there i no
>> way I would have agreed to constantly recode UTF-16 to UTF-8 and
>> back. C++ API for DOM is defined as the output of C++ header generator
>> on the CORBA bindings, eek :-(
>
> is it ? I'v never seen anything about an officially endorsed C++ xml API
> (DOM, SAX, whatever). In any case, I believe on the boost list the 
> consensus
> was not to rewrite the java-like APIs in C++ but rather use C++ specific
> idioms as much as possible.
> While I would be satisfied in an implementation that wraps libxml2,
> boost people obviously want to be sure that an API that gets accepted is
> implementable by other backends, too.


Have you seen the new serialization module ? It includes XML as a 
possible archive format, which is even more generic since XML is just a 
backend to the lib.

Regards,

Christophe