[antlr-interest] XML parsing

[Matt Benson]

I'd appreciate that.  Wonder how close it is to being
finished?

-Matt

--- Andrew Deren <andrew at adersoftware.com> wrote:
> Yes. It works like recursive-descent parser. I
> actually did a project where
> you would specify rules and code blocks to execute
> on each match and it
> would generate xml pull program for your xml. I
> never really finished it,
> but I could send you what I have so far.
> Andrew
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Matt Benson [mailto:gudnabrsam at yahoo.com] 
> Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2003 9:26 AM
> To: antlr-interest at yahoogroups.com
> 
> So according to the xml pull suggestion, you would
> set
> up your rules in a similar manner to how Antlr
> parsers
> are built, with rule methods calling subrule
> methods,
> passing along an XmlPullParser from which each rule
> or
> subrule method can pull content?
> 
> Thanks,
> Matt
> 
> 
> --- Andrew Deren <andrew at adersoftware.com> wrote:
> > Antlr might be a good approach, but I think SAX or
> > XML Pull
> > (http://www.xmlpull.org/) might be better
> solution.
> > They have lower
> > overhead, and are specifically designed for
> handling
> > large xml documents.
> > As for repetitions and parent relations, I would
> use
> > Stack (or if you're
> > using xml pull, method calls) to keep track of
> where
> > you are.
> > Andrew
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Matt Benson [mailto:gudnabrsam at yahoo.com] 
> > Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2003 9:09 AM
> > To: Antlr List
> > 
> > I am involved with a project of which one of the
> > most
> > daunting components is to take a large XML
> document
> > and insert its contents in a relational database. 
> > The
> > structure of the document allows for repetitions
> of
> > many of its elements, and may include the same
> types
> > of elements with different meanings based on
> > context. 
> > I was trying to decide whether something like XSLT
> > might help with this problem, when I was struck by
> > the
> > idea that a recursive-descent parser might be the
> > thing to use.  This way we could specify structure
> > by
> > use of rules, and Antlr's use of parameters and
> > return
> > values could allow us to specify a contextual
> > interpretation to an element, and receive a value
> by
> > which to associate it with a parent relational
> > database record.  Does this sound like a good
> > approach?  Can anyone offer a better alternative?
> > 
> > TIA,
> > Matt
> > 
> > __________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync
> to
> > Outlook(TM).
> > http://calendar.yahoo.com
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to
> Outlook(TM).
> http://calendar.yahoo.com
> 
>  
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 
> 
> 


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).
http://calendar.yahoo.com

 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/