intertwingly

I talked to Aaron Swartz about xmltramp.  Native mapping of XML to a dynamic language appeals to both of us.

Inside of the explorations of a Python implementation of Gump there is a similar effort.  The key difference is the notion of the ability to read the XML 'into' a application specific data structure.

The ability to have methods to init and complete the datastructure can offload a lot of work off the application.  The ability to define an attribute as a list enables one to iterate over child elements of a like kind... a common need in many XML grammars.

When I wrote this logic, I marveled at the ability to easily define an application specific mapping in Python vs using an existing framework, but now that I look back, there would be value in factoring this out into a reusable component.