| ||
Wed 2024-04-24
Tue 2024-04-23
Fri 2024-04-19
Thu 2024-04-18
Mon 2024-04-15
Butterick’s Practical Typography Sat 2024-04-13
Fri 2024-04-12
Wed 2024-04-10
Boy Meets Boy Meets Boys’ Love Tue 2024-04-09
Search
Archives
2023
12 11 10 09 08 07 06 05 04 03 02 01
2022
2021
2020
2019
2018
2017
2016
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
One good site
MDN
Nelson Minar
Blog licensed under a Creative Commons License
|
Many thanks to Uche for his
thoughts and
code responding to
my
frustration working with XML in Python. If you're reading this because
you want to write good XML code in Python, read
his stuff! He knows
much better than I. And he gives clear guidance: use his Amara if you want
something Pythonic that can deal with XML.
But reading Uche's posts confirms my main point. There are too many XML choices in Python. And the obvious ones aren't right. Apparently PyXML isn't what I'm supposed to be using (despite it being the default when I type import xml on my Debian box), and if you use it the way the docs say to you're wrong. Urgh! And while I like what Uche says about Amara, is this the easy way to say "parse an XML document"?
from amara import binderytools
He explains why all this is necessary for this
example (Amara by default doesn't support
XPath attributes), but it's just this kind of complexity that frustrates me.
Python's strength is that there's a clear, obvious way to do simple
things. But not with XML.
rule = binderytools.preserve_attribute_details(u'*') doc = binderytools.bind_file("foo.opml", rules=[rule])
See this response
from Uche, with lots of good samples and comments.
|
|
