Talk:Parsing and serializing XML: Difference between revisions

From MozillaZine Knowledge Base
Jump to navigationJump to search
No edit summary
mNo edit summary
 
(6 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
*I think "Parsing and serializing XML" would make a better name.
"Serializing DOM trees to files" section doesn't make any sense at all when it's talking about xmlhttprequest. If you wanted to write about saving remote files' contents, it would better be on xmlhttprequest's page.
*Any reason to link to unstable.elemental.com instead of xulplanet as we usually do?
 
----
What's the idea behind "Serializing XMLHttpRequest objects to files" paragraph? I ask because this example is incorrect:
serializer.serializeToStream(xmlHttpRequest.responseText, foStream, "IS0-8859-1");
it either should serialize xmlHttpRequest.responseXML or just write responseText to the stream. If one just wants to write the result of GET request to a file, it makes no sense to serialize parsed responseXML.
[[User:Asqueella|asqueella]]
[[User:Asqueella|asqueella]]


change what you like...
::I'm not sure I follow everything you're saying. I think you're saying one can simply write req.responseText to a file; there's no need to use XMLSerializer. If that's what you're saying, then I agree. [[User:Grimholtz|grimholtz]]
:I will [[User:Asqueella|asqueella]]
:::That's part of what I was saying. But after we change the code to simply write responseText, what will it have to do with parsing or serializing XML? I think it's unrelated and should be on XMLHttpRequest page. [[User:Asqueella|asqueella]]
::done [[User:Asqueella|asqueella]]
::::OK [[User:Grimholtz|grimholtz]]
 
asqueella, can you fix the link "[#Parsing strings into DOM trees]"? I don't know how to link to internally using MediaWiki. In fact, do you know of a MediaWiki resource where I can look up information such as this? [[User:grimholtz|grimholtz]] 17:18 10 Mar 2005 EST
:The whole point of using XMLHttpRequest was to use already parsed <code>responseXML</code>, so you don't need to link that. fyi, I do such links using <nowiki>[[Parsing and serializing XML#anchor | visible text]]</nowiki>, don't know if it's correct though. MediaWiki help is available at  [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Help#MediaWiki_User.27s_Guide metawiki]. [[User:Asqueella|asqueella]]
 
 
:''You should change this to GET/POST/PUT/DELETE/OPTIONS/TRACE/HEAD if using an HTTP(S) URL.''
Can this be changed to something less cryptic to a beginner? [[User:Asqueella|asqueella]]
 
ok

Latest revision as of 20:09, 18 March 2005

"Serializing DOM trees to files" section doesn't make any sense at all when it's talking about xmlhttprequest. If you wanted to write about saving remote files' contents, it would better be on xmlhttprequest's page.


What's the idea behind "Serializing XMLHttpRequest objects to files" paragraph? I ask because this example is incorrect:

serializer.serializeToStream(xmlHttpRequest.responseText, foStream, "IS0-8859-1");

it either should serialize xmlHttpRequest.responseXML or just write responseText to the stream. If one just wants to write the result of GET request to a file, it makes no sense to serialize parsed responseXML. asqueella

I'm not sure I follow everything you're saying. I think you're saying one can simply write req.responseText to a file; there's no need to use XMLSerializer. If that's what you're saying, then I agree. grimholtz
That's part of what I was saying. But after we change the code to simply write responseText, what will it have to do with parsing or serializing XML? I think it's unrelated and should be on XMLHttpRequest page. asqueella
OK grimholtz