[reportlab-users] pyRXP and processing instructions

[Dennis Allison]

On Tue, 4 Mar 2003, Andy Robinson wrote:

> > My suggestion is that we return 
> > comments and processing instructions as
> > 
> >         ('<!--',None,['comment text'],None)
> > and
> >         ('<?',None,['name','processing instruction text'],None)
> > 
> > An alternative for the latter would be 
> > 
> >         ('<?',{name: 'name'},['processing instruction text'],None)
> > 
> 
> Both fine by me. It's clear that the concept for pyRXP circa 1.0 is
> a fairly homogeneous tree of primitive Python types; you should set
> parser flags to decide whether XML constructs come straight through 
> as text or nodes. This does not rule out a pyRXP 2.0 with objects one 
> day, but not right now :-)
> 

I like this choice too.
What was the purpose of the arg in the tuple tree?  How can it be neatly
used?