[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

RE: Validation vs performance - was Re: Fast text ou


brain learns syntax
On Tue, 2004-04-20 at 03:13, Henrik Martensson wrote:
> On Mon, 2004-04-19 at 16:46, Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:
> > I don't buy it.   I buy that people are creating alternative 
> > syntaxes, alternative applications (eg, RELAX NG which may 
> > or may not have an 'unstoppable momentum' but has yet to 
> > show up in an RFP so not in prime time yet).  I don't buy 
> > that these are easier to learn or read once one is comfortable 
> > with XML.  To me the ease of any one feature or the complexity of 
> > any one language is quickly overcome by the network effect of 
> > instances and tools shared widely.
> 
> Readability has a lot to do with verbosity, and the RELAX NG compact
> syntax is certainly a lot less verbose than the XML syntax.
> 
> Another point in favor of the compact syntax is the use of regex-like
> constructs. As a programmer, this is something I am already comfortable
> with.
> 
> One could adapt a readability formula, such as Flesch-Kincaid or SMOG to
> work with schema syntax. (Well, for the purposes of this discussion,
> anyway.) If one did, one would find that the compact syntax is
> considerably easier to read, especially for more complex expressions.
> 
> Whether one perceives this difference in readability is another matter.
> I certainly do. On the other hand, if one is good enough at interpreting
> the XML syntax, the extra cognitive load would not be noticeable. It
> would probably still be _measurable_ though.
> 
> Does anyone know if there has been any work done on the readability of
> programming languages? I suspect it would be quite interesting reading.
> 
can't quite believe that you used regex and readability in the same
sentence ;)

readability i'm sure has a lot to do with familiarity. the brain learns
to look for patterns, ignore them and then get the content. 

that's why consistent layout is important - more important than the
actual layout. there's probably an ibm paper on this somewhere, they did
a lot of work on these things in the 70's and 80's.

C is a classic - should you use

if ... {
	}

or

if ....
	{
	}

or

if ... {
}

etc ?

doesn't matter too much, so long as it's consistent.

i've even heard apl programmers claim readability - and that would have
to be the ultimate compact language!

rick


> /Henrik
> 
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an
> initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>
> 
> The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
> manager: <http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/index.php>
> 


PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!

Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!

Buy Stylus Studio Now

Download The World's Best XML IDE!

Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!

Don't miss another message! Subscribe to this list today.
Email
First Name
Last Name
Company
Subscribe in XML format
RSS 2.0
Atom 0.3
 

Stylus Studio has published XML-DEV in RSS and ATOM formats, enabling users to easily subcribe to the list from their preferred news reader application.


Stylus Studio Sponsored Links are added links designed to provide related and additional information to the visitors of this website. they were not included by the author in the initial post. To view the content without the Sponsor Links please click here.

Site Map | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Trademarks
Free Stylus Studio XML Training:
W3C Member
Stylus Studio® and DataDirect XQuery ™are products from DataDirect Technologies, is a registered trademark of Progress Software Corporation, in the U.S. and other countries. © 2004-2013 All Rights Reserved.