From 2e716fe5e9e2e228d267a88e694cc6671c7a760a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: "sgunderson@bigfoot.com" <>
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2007 19:25:17 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] Documentation update.

---
 doc/intro.txt | 20 +++++++++++---------
 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)

diff --git a/doc/intro.txt b/doc/intro.txt
index f4f7e97..dccf7d9 100644
--- a/doc/intro.txt
+++ b/doc/intro.txt
@@ -17,8 +17,8 @@ to check out the code and this documentation.
 
 There is a lot to be said about design philosophy, but let's first give a
 simple example to give you the feel of how it works. (The example is in Perl,
-but there are also functionally equivalent PHP, Python and Ruby versions, and
-more languages should probably come soon.)
+but there are also functionally equivalent PHP, Python and Ruby versions;
+ports to other languages would be welcome.)
 
 Template (simple.xml):
 
@@ -248,13 +248,15 @@ The main thoughts behind XML::Template have been, in no particular order:
    than only supporting one language or having someting that needs to reimplement
    the entire DOM with wrappers for each language. (Thankfully, by relying on
    the DOM support in each language, the code so far is under 200 lines per
-   implementation, so maintaining this hopefully shouldn't be much work.)
-   As proof-of-concept, I've got Perl, PHP, Python and Ruby implementations
-   that work and feel largely the same -- other implementations are welcome.
-   (This is backed up by a test suite, which ensures that all the different
-   implementations return structurally equivalent XML for a certain set of
-   test cases. Porting to a new language is not difficult, and once you've
-   got all the test cases to pass, your work is most likely done.)
+   implementation, so maintaining this hopefully shouldn't be much work.) As
+   proof-of-concept, there are got Perl, PHP, Python and Ruby implementations
+   that work and feel largely the same (and even a SAX-based Perl
+   implementation, for larger trees that won't fit into memory) -- other
+   implementations are welcome.  This is backed up by a test suite, which
+   ensures that all the different implementations return structurally
+   equivalent XML for a certain set of test cases. Porting to a new language
+   is not difficult, and once you've got all the test cases to pass, your
+   work is most likely done.
 
 As a side note to the second point, I've spent some time wondering exactly
 _why_ you want to separate the back-end logic from your HTML, and why people
-- 
2.39.2