[XML-SIG] XML package organization

[Andrew Kuchling]

Lars Marius Garshol writes:
>xml.
>    dom.*                -> DOM stuff
>    sax.                 -> SAX stuff
>        parsers.*        -> one package for each parser
>The "parsers" package is proposed because I think it will make some of
>the features in my proposed saxlib update easier to implement and
>generally make the whole thing more tidy.

	OK, but should it be in sax, as in your diagram, or as a
separate subpackage under xml?  It seems to make sense to change the
dom subpackage to use such alternate parsers, and if other XML
representations become useful, they'd use these parsers as well.

>Oh, and the XML browser should of course have its own package. :)

	xml.browser, of course.

	Lars, unless someone speaks up and points out flaws in this
proposal, you can go ahead and implement it.  We can't wait forever
for feedback that never comes.


A.M. Kuchling			http://starship.skyport.net/crew/amk/
[On applications for Microsoft Windows] Testing? That's scheduled for first
thing after 3.0 ships. Quality is job Floating Point Error; Execution
Terminated.
	-- Benjamin Ketcham, in _comp.os.unix.advocacy_.