[antlr-interest] XML transformation support for 3.0

[Matt Benson]

For what it's worth, Oliver's XPA package really does
make it nice and easy to specify an XML grammar using
ANTLR EBNF.

-Matt

--- Oliver Zeigermann <oliver at zeigermann.de> wrote:

> Terence Parr wrote:
> 
> > On Aug 7, 2004, at 7:03 AM, Oliver Zeigermann
> wrote:
> > 
> > 
> >>Folks!
> >>
> >>ANTLR 3.0 seems to actually make it and I am
> looking forward to it. It
> >>was once discussed to add XML transformation
> support to ANTLR. If
> >>Terence and the rest of the ANTLR community still
> are interested I can
> >>help with that.
> >>
> >>I have added XML transformation support to 2.x and
> it turned out to be 
> >>a
> >>very poweful, yet a bit less convenient
> alternative to XSLT.
> >>
> >>Now, as ANTLR 3.0 might allow interpreted *and*
> compiled parsing and -
> >>if things go well ;) - will allow for a standard
> syntax for AST
> >>construction etc. it will suit nearly perfect for
> XML transformations.
> >>The interpreted thing with only standard syntax
> for AST creation for
> >>simply ad hoc transformations and the compiled
> version for complex and
> >>performance critical stuff.
> > 
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > I hope to make ANTLR's trees be XML compatible or
> compliant or 
> > convertible etc... (there is an unfortunately
> method naming/return type 
> 
> Not sure if we talk about the same thing here. Are
> you talking about 
> ASTs supporting DOM interfaces or such? Why that?
> I'd say do not bother 
> about compatibility with XML APIs. If someone wants
> DOM simply let him 
> write an adapter. If someone wants PDOM? Same
> thing...
> 
> 
> > issue). XML is just a tree so I expect to support
> XML transformations 
> > in that sense.  You'll never see anything like
> xpath or whatever come 
> > from me, however....What kind of transformations
> were you thinking 
> > about?
> 
> Of course you can easily transform *generic* XML
> without any problem, 
> but also without the most benefit. In generic XML
> you would have token 
> types like "start element", "end element" and
> "text".
> 
> To make use of the full power of ANTLR you would
> have to have a token 
> type for *each* element possible in the XML to
> transform. This is a bit 
> harder to do, but leads to great (and I repeat
> myself *great*) 
> transaformation power both in obviousness and
> brevity of code certainly 
> unmatched by XSLT or any other XML/SGML
> transformation language I can 
> across.
> 
> If desired I can give an example how a generic and a
> specific grammar 
> would look like, omitted it here to keep the post
> small...
> 
> > For sure, we should have a standard XML parser and
> generator, though, 
> > right?
> 
> Standard XML parsers can interface to SAX, DOM and
> some to a new 
> straming API. Would be best to interface ANTLR to
> all of them. Would be 
> great if we not only had it interface to ASTs, but
> also to token 
> streams. I can go into detail if anyone is
> interested.
> 
> Oliver
> 
> 
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
>     antlr-interest-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
> 
>  
> 
> 



		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail 


 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/antlr-interest/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    antlr-interest-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com

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