[XML-SIG] Re: Developer's Day

[Randall Hopper]

Andrew M. Kuchling:
 |However, thinking about it more, I still lean against inclusion...
 |
 |    * Python revisions come out slowly, once every year or two.  XML
 |    standards have been revolving faster , and we don't want to wait
 |    until 1.7 for SAX2, or DOM Level2, or other new revisions.
 |    Keeping the modules out of the core lets them be updated at their
 |    own pace.

I guess I don't follow.  xmllib is there, though xml is updated at its own
pace.  I wouldn't think if xml was there it would hold xml dev back, unless
the APIs are going to change radically.  However, aren't SAX and DOM standard?

I'd vote for inclusion to give folks something to work with.  Personall I
try to avoid depending on add-ons when possible because my scripts won't
"just work" for anyone that has Python installed.  There's the:

       1) how do I get your version of the package, 
       2) how do I install it, and 
       3) them deciding if it's really worth the effort.

that they have to go through.

There's no "import xmllib.dom" or "import xmllib.sax" today, and those are
standard APIs, aren't they?  I think that alone is strong reason to push
for inclusion in 1.6.  With those standards out there, I'm less inclined to
build on xmllib.

Perhaps a compromise solution would be to add xml to 1.6 and only export
(document) the XML interfaces that are standards-based and aren't expected
to change.

-- 
Randall Hopper
aa8vb@yahoo.com