- From: Michael(tm) Smith <mike@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2010 07:02:46 +0900
- To: Ville Skytt¸«£ <ville.skytta@iki.fi>
- Cc: Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org>, public-qa-dev@w3.org, ted@w3.org, jean-gui@w3.org, tgambet@w3.org
Ville Skytt¸«£ <ville.skytta@iki.fi>, 2010-06-14 01:00 +0300: > On Friday 11 June 2010, Dominique Hazael-Massieux wrote: > > Le vendredi 11 juin 2010 ¸«¢ 01:34 +0300, Ville Skytt¸«£ a ¸«±crit : > > > Sigh. The more I work with XML::LibXML, the less I like it :( > > > > I'm hoping these are transient problems with that library rather than > > structural ones; or are you thinking we should look into the possibility > > of getting rid of that dependency altogether? > > Well, it is kind of overkill for what the validator uses it for, does not seem > to be that actively maintained, and I'm finding more gotchas with it than I'd > like (documentation isn't that great). And for pretty much the most > interesting thing for validator usage -- error handling -- it has two > implementations of which it may use one or the other, and the docs don't say > which of them is used in which scenarios :( Those seem like some very good reasons for investing some time and energy in figuring out if we can eliminate the XML::LibXML dependency -- either by replacing it with XML::Parser or by altogether dropping the check its being used to perform. --Mike -- Michael(tm) Smith http://people.w3.org/mike
Received on Monday, 14 June 2010 22:02:50 UTC