Mensaje citado por Duncan Coutts
Something which wasn't mentioned but is quite useful is type-specialised xml parsers. Some tools manipulate xml generically, giving you back some DOM tree which is great if you are writing a general purpose xml parser. However most uses know exactly what DTD/Schema/Type they are dealing with and would like to get their own data type back from the parser (as well as having the parser validate it). This allows you to use the parser/pretty printer in a similar way to ordinary read/show. Other people have pointed out that this should make xslt-style transformations really easy (and type safe). (Automatically deriving readXML/showXML would be nice!)
Some Haskell xml libs/tookits have tools for converting DTD<->Haskell types.
We made some experiments embedding G-codes (ISO 6983) in Haskell. We defined a DTD for the G-codes format and use HaXml as the authors indicate. It works! both experiments they said. HaXml is useful for converting XML <-> Haskell!
I suggest this would be a very useful feature of a standard xml library.
Duncan
We suggest more comprehensive experiments before convert HaXml a standard Haskell library. Regards. Gustavo. ------------------------------------------------- This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/