On Mon, 4 Jun 2007, Aaron Spike wrote:
Terry Brown wrote:
Not sure if it's adequate, but Python 2.5 has moved most of the ElementTree DOM library into the standard Python libraries, which would have the advantage of not being a separate dependency.
Not having an external dep would be fantastic. But right now I'm calling the lack of advanced XPath support a debilitating inadequacy. Thus far
I guess I agree with that. It's amusing / annoying that both Java and Python seem to make you jump through hoops to get full XPath.
I've used the vanilla libxml python bindings, I'd say they're a usable alternative, although if lxml is "more pythonic" that would be a plus...
I imagine the vanilla libxml python bindings are unlikely to disappear, so it becomes a question of trying to guess whether lxml can be depended on to stick around and not "do a PyXML".
Cheers -Terry
all my knowledge of ElementTree is academic, it could very well do more than the documents I've read give it credit for. I think ElementTree's inclusion in the python standard library is another vote in favor of lxml actually. Because more people will be familiar with the api and with lxml we get the added features in addition.
Aaron Spike