[KinoSearch] FieldSpec/InvIndexSpec API

[Mike Wexler]

If its valid XML then the output can be read or written by other XML 
processors.
It also means that you can capitalize on the existing knowledge in 
people's heads about XML.
It should be known that XML itself is a precedent for this. XML is just 
such a limited implementation of XML with many of the features taken out.

Tony Bowden wrote:
> Peter Karman wrote:
>>> For now, all we need is a way to convey small amounts of data in a 
>>> tree structure.  I think if we limit ourselves to a strict subset of 
>>> XML, writing our own C parser will be simple enough.  Here's a 
>>> starting set of constraints:
>>>
>>>   * No attributes.
>>>   * ASCII-only.
>>>   * No escapes.
>>>
>>> Basically, nothing except for paired tags indicating node name, with 
>>> a text value and optional child nodes.
>> yes, given the XML you've been describing, it makes sense to go with 
>> a very lightweight parser.
>> Glad to see you're going the XML route for now; writing the parser 
>> aside, I think it'll make life easier having a human-readable meta 
>> format.
> Perhaps I've missed this in earlier discussion, but if you're not 
> actually going to use XML, and are going to roll your own parser, why 
> use an XML-like format? On top of the confusion from users who think 
> that it is actually XML, wouldn't it be easier to create a format 
> that's both easier for a human to read and easier to parse? (e.g. 
> something more YAML-like)
>
> Tony
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> KinoSearch mailing list
> KinoSearch at rectangular.com
> http://www.rectangular.com/mailman/listinfo/kinosearch