World: r3wp

my own  when I started the project I did not have many days to "get 
on with it" and for various reasons all the tools I tried didn't 
properly load the specification I was trying to load.

but there where some errors in the datafile itself, in the begining.

it had to do with http dowloading of the chunks...

my tool currenctly loads 1MB of xml tags in under a second.  its 
almost as fast as load/markup.

yet builds a nested block of blocks much like RebXML.

does it work SAX way or DOM way? I mean - load first, then parse, 
or parse while reading way?

it does all in one shot.  I read through the string once and have 
a nifty recursion with tail handling.

I want to try out with rebcode one day.  it would probably go about 
10 times faster or more.

hmm, I think that our problem is not lack of speed, but lack of fully 
compliant xml parser at first....

yep.

reading the xml spec... its no wonder.

no wonder what?

pekr: no wonder there's still no fully compliant xml parser

my god reading the w3c spec for XML is insane.
 LOL

I always thought the c in W3c meant committee not consortium.  ;-)

Maxim yes, RebXML can handle namespace tags and unicode.

Geomol,  you might just have made yourself a new user :-)  I'll try 
to stress-test RebXML next week, gauging speed, features and stability.

anyone know if any XML Schema integration has been done in REBOL?

We have done a little in Qtask.  WE save the tasks as XML (and call 
it XLS so that Excel can load it).
We will be writing an RSS reader soon.

there's a new script in the library %rebelxml.r ( not sure why it 
isn't rebolxml.r )

what's the difference between RebXML, and rebelxml and other implementations?

which is best to use?

( I know nothing really of XML .. just know I have to parse some 
data, and rewrite out my data as xml )

I'm using rebxml as the loader and then write a dialect over it to 
convert to my preffered (easier to use) block format.

what do think of this new script ?

Its news to me, but in my useage, Its easier for me to have rebol 
loaded blocks, cause I can use path notation directly, in order to 
access the data, just as if they where objects.

I must admit that just by looking at the docs, I prefer Geomol's 
solution better, its more approachable.

that's my 2 cents.  and a 2 minute overlook of rebelxml.r

Where's your script ? :)

rebxml can be found here, with docs :-)   

http://home.tiscali.dk/john.niclasen/rebxml/

also, although I have not looked at rebelxml in this regard, rebxml 
handles many of the xml idiosyncracies in the XML specification like 
empty tags, CDATA blocks, and some level of character conversion 
to handle unicode and & escaped chars.

Great to see my work is being used! :-)

How does rebxml compare to gavin withead xml-parser.r ?

its easy to use? and will get your job done within minutes of trying. 
  ;-)

I used Gavin's code in the past and found very complete and useful, 
specially when using xml-object.r

it seems powerfull, but I had a hard type getting it to work.  I 
WAS pressed for time though.

speaking of XPath (Reichart's msg on Altme group), I wonder if there's 
need for it in the community?

1) people want XSLT and XPath in rebol, because it's the standard 
and so on.

2) people want a dialect that offerst XSLT/XPath-like functionality 
to work on REBOL trees (as opposed to XML)

3) noone cares about representing data as trees in REBOL because 
dialects are much better anyway

(pick your choice :)

why not post this on REBOLTalk.com forum as a poll?

have AltMe, ML user participate in this poll

i'm just trying to get some ideas. not a real poll. but maybe we 
can post this on reboltalk too.

I'd lead towards 3.

But that's because I heft XML into REBOL objects and fiddle with 
it from there.

That gets away from the strict hierachy of XML, so I don't need to 
think about basically insane things like XSLT's axis processing

and we already have data as trees in rebol, nested blocks and objects... 
so I don't think its going to help much.

although getting XML:schema LOAD/SAVE , complete, native  XML 1.0 
LOAD/SAVE  that would at least allow us to start using XML in the 
first place  ;-)

so my vote  3)

we already have data as trees

 - if you use that, then tree rewriting would be very useful for you, 
 wouldn't it?

can you further define "tree rewriting"

does having XSLT also means we can map that into /View?

well, if you can write a stylesheet that outputs a layout.  Not at 
all impossible, <xsl:output method="text" />

max: tree rewriting is the technique that compilers use to get from 
the source AST to the final machine code; you can also imagine purely 
functional languages as special tree rewriting engines.