[sync] Definitions for other PI

[Anthony Mills]

Because I programming in Java and C++, I would not mind using a SAX 
parser.  It would take no time to change to SAX and the logic of the 
code would not have to change either.  You may want to envolve 
SAXproject.org, or include it with PEAR.  Just my two bits on the matter.

BTW Chuck is right, why not use what is there.  We use a SAX like api, 
that I think is simpler, if not as portable.

Thanks,
Anthony

Anton Hummel wrote:
> dear chuck
> 
> 
>>Is there a reason you don't want to work with the code we already have
> 
> working?
> 
> This code is ok, but my motivation is a little bit different.
> 
> If I use a sax-api based parser i could use all those nice saxbased tools
> with a
> little change to the code. The only thing is to instantiate the the
> wbxml-sax parser instead of the xml-parser and i could work on an binary
> stram or file.
> 
> My intension to get more knowledge about wbxml is not at first SyncML.
> I would use it to distribute und process large xml-files for an ecommerce
> application and so safe executiontime while  adding/updating large amount of
> product-data. While wbxml did not have so much overhead on tags it speeds up
> heavily on processing large xml-file. My testdata is about 5-7 MB in size.
> 
> - Anton
> 
> 
>