Re: Processing instructions for style tweaks?

Glenn Adams (glenn@stonehand.com)
Tue, 13 Dec 94 22:52:08 -0500


Message-Id: <9412140352.AA01352@trubetzkoy.metis.com>
From: Glenn Adams <glenn@stonehand.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 94 22:52:08 -0500
To: James C Deikun <jcdst10+@pitt.edu>
Subject: Re: Processing instructions for style tweaks?
Cc: Multiple recipients of list <www-html@www0.cern.ch>


  Date: Tue, 13 Dec 1994 22:21:31 -0500 (EST)
  From: James C Deikun <jcdst10+@pitt.edu>

  The memory footprint for a fully validating SGML parser would be trivially
  greater than that for a simply functional one.

I must disagree. Compare a full SGML parser which supports SUBDOC, LINK,
a full entity manager, alternate SGML declarations, and arbitrary DTD
parsing to a parser which employs a pre-parsed DTD with a fixed base
set, has limited entity support, doesn't support SUBDOC or LINK, etc.,
and I think you'll find a vast difference in memory footprints.  Do the
numbers.

Regards,
Glenn Adams