XOM API for Processing XML with Java

["Lance Eason" <leason AT betweenmarkets.com>]

Elliotte Harold wrote:

> Because they are persistently misused and misunderstood.

Out of genuine curiosity, what constitutes a 'misuse' of a CDATA
section?  I tend to use them as syntactic sugar to say please don't
obfuscate this particular piece of text with a bunch of '<', '>'
and '&' encodings.

> XOM does the best job it can to manage human legibility (by internally
preserving CDATA sections where possible).

If you buy the legibility argument aren't you in effect saying then that
it's okay for other programs to use CDATA sections to create legible
documents and XOM will even go the extra mile to preserve the legibility
of those documents but it's not okay for XOM to create similarly legible
documents?  Just seems inconsistent.  Either CDATA sections are a
legitimately useful construct in which case it would be useful for XOM
to support them or they're not in which case there's no particular
reason for XOM to preserve them.

Overall by the way I've found XOM to be an amazingly pleasant API to
work with and in conjunction with NUX we've been able to achieve some
significant performance enhancements by moving to it.