Time to standardize the XML library for C/C++

Discussion in 'C Programming' started by Kong Bhat, Apr 7, 2004.

  1. Kong Bhat

    Kong Bhat Guest

    With XML becoming the de facto data description standard, I am
    extremely surprised that there is no movement towards standardizing an
    xml library API for use with C and C++. Personally I have been
    working with libxml2 (www.gnome.org) for a while now, and I am quite
    comfortable with it. I believe that libxml2 is a good start, but I
    think a slimmer version of libxml2 should be standardized.


    Any thoughts?

    Regards,
    Kong Posh
    Kong Bhat, Apr 7, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. In article <>, "Kong Bhat"
    <> wrote:




    > With XML becoming the de facto data description standard, I am extremely
    > surprised that there is no movement towards standardizing an xml library API
    > for use with C and C++. Personally I have been working with libxml2
    > (www.gnome.org) for a while now, and I am quite comfortable with it. I
    > believe that libxml2 is a good start, but I think a slimmer version of
    > libxml2 should be standardized. Any thoughts? Regards,


    Why do you feel this is a C language question? This isn't an XML advocacy ng
    you know.
    Mark A. Odell, Apr 7, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Kong Bhat wrote:
    > ... I think a slimmer version of libxml2 should be standardized.


    "Feel free."
    Douglas A. Gwyn, Apr 7, 2004
    #3
  4. Kong Bhat wrote:

    > With XML becoming the de facto data description standard,
    > I am extremely surprised that there is no movement
    > toward standardizing an xml library API for use with C and C++.
    > Personally, I have been working with libxml2 (www.gnome.org)
    > for a while now and I am quite comfortable with it.
    > I believe that libxml2 is a good start
    > but I think a slimmer version of libxml2 should be standardized.


    How is this on-topic in comp.std.c, comp.lang.c or comp.lang.c++?
    Do you want to make this library part of the standard library?
    If so, is there a compelling reason why this library must be implemented
    by the compiler developer and not a third party vendor?
    If the library can be implemented by third party vendors, then
    a standard separate from the C/C++ standards may be a better option.
    E. Robert Tisdale, Apr 7, 2004
    #4
  5. In article <>,
    Kong Bhat <> wrote:

    >With XML becoming the de facto data description standard, I am
    >extremely surprised that there is no movement towards standardizing an
    >xml library API for use with C and C++.


    It would not be appropriate to make this part of the C standard.
    There are a million things that should be standardized first:
    we don't even have lists or hash tables!

    -- Richard
    Richard Tobin, Apr 7, 2004
    #5
  6. Kong Bhat

    Kong Bhat Guest

    (Richard Tobin) wrote in message news:<c51or4$g5i$>...
    > In article <>,
    > Kong Bhat <> wrote:
    >
    > >With XML becoming the de facto data description standard, I am
    > >extremely surprised that there is no movement towards standardizing an
    > >xml library API for use with C and C++.

    >
    > It would not be appropriate to make this part of the C standard.
    > There are a million things that should be standardized first:
    > we don't even have lists or hash tables!
    >
    > -- Richard


    Kindly note that I am only in favor of standardizing the API. There
    could be multiple implementations that conform to that API (including
    Richard's very own "newRXP" parser), in much the same way that we have
    standard APIs for I/O handling, string manipulation, mathematical
    functions etc. The big advantage of that would be that code written
    to handle XML processing would become extremely portable.

    I will put my money on the prediction that XML processing within C/C++
    applications will take off in a very very big way in the next few
    years, especially as the use of WebServices becomes more widespread.
    That is why I strongly feel that the time is ripe to move towards
    standardizing this API.

    Regards,
    Kong Posh
    Kong Bhat, Apr 8, 2004
    #6
  7. Kong Bhat

    James Kuyper Guest

    Kong Bhat wrote:
    >
    > With XML becoming the de facto data description standard, I am
    > extremely surprised that there is no movement towards standardizing an
    > xml library API for use with C and C++. Personally I have been
    > working with libxml2 (www.gnome.org) for a while now, and I am quite
    > comfortable with it. I believe that libxml2 is a good start, but I
    > think a slimmer version of libxml2 should be standardized.
    >
    > Any thoughts?


    That's an excellent idea - whoever is responsible for XML should
    establish a standard library for generating/parsing it. Such a library
    would, of course, be too specialized to have any proper place in the
    C/C++ standard libraries.
    James Kuyper, Apr 8, 2004
    #7
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Generic Usenet Account
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    482
    Dan Pop
    Jun 8, 2004
  2. Kong Bhat
    Replies:
    17
    Views:
    516
    Dietmar Kuehl
    Apr 13, 2004
  3. Generic Usenet Account

    libxml needs to be tamed (standardize C/C++ XML library?)

    Generic Usenet Account, Jun 8, 2004, in forum: C Programming
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    335
    Dan Pop
    Jun 8, 2004
  4. Replies:
    0
    Views:
    296
  5. The_Kingpin
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    434
Loading...

Share This Page