- From: Chin Chee-Kai <cheekai@s...>
- To: Andrew Welch <andrew.j.welch@g...>
- Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2008 11:07:50 +0800
Hmm, it looks like perhaps the
syntax has use in some cases, but what I see is that it appears to need
more syntactical characters than the XML instance - ie a little
cumbersome. Advantage is probably its function-oriented syntax, which
eases implementation and understanding during programming.
I'm experimenting with a WYSIWUG syntax like:
x = <!--xml
<car
year="2008">
<model>Prius</model>
</car>
xml-->;
https://sourceforge.net/forum/forum.php?thread_id=2197744&forum_id=861535
Regards,
Chin Chee-Kai
Andrew Welch wrote:
74a894af0809080602y38afc5ebu7d32b050724b079d@m..."
type="cite">
Just stumbled across this:
http://www.ociweb.com/mark/programming/WAX.html
Here's an example from that page, which demonstrates its method
chaining approach:
wax.start("car").attr("year", 2008).child("model", "Prius").close();
creates:
<car year="2008">
<model>Prius</model>
</car>
...which is nice.
|
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
|
Cart
