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

Re: Do I need to use a validating parser?

• From: "Rick Jelliffe" <ricko@a...>
• To: "XML Developers' List" <xml-dev@i...>
• Date: Fri, 7 May 1999 01:13:09 +1000

From: Joshua E. Smith <jesmith@k...>

 >My language isn't anything like LISP or ALGOL, but I think this gets
the
>point across.  It's pretty easy to write programming languages which
are
>XML-Conformant.

>From one point of view, all interaction actions with a computer
corresponds to "programming" in a language (in that a grammar, however
complicated, can be constructed to model it: I suppose this is an
implication of Church's Thesis).  While true, that viewpoint deprives
"programming" of its specific meaning; it makes "programming
language"=="markup language"=="interaction modeling language".  It
ignores that a markup language is designed to be data with processing
instructions embedded, while a programming language is processing
instuctions with data embedded.

Of course, there are middle grounds: there are data-ish programming
languages such as LISP, and programmish DTDs such as ISMID.

If you are looking at making programming languages in XML, look at
ISMID, which is a compiled format for IETMS (Interactive Electronic
Technical Manuals).
You can see it at the US Navy site (www.ietm.net) or (better) at the ISO
site:
http://www.jtc1.org/Navigation.asp?Area=Structure&Mode=Browse&SubComm=SC
*space*34&x=7&y=6
then go "documents" then search for "MID" (remember to click the "Search
by title" button") then clock on document 7, "Revised Text of MID".

Rick Jelliffe



xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i...
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)

• Prev by Date: RE: The Protocol [was: Syntax] is API Fallacy
• Next by Date: Re: The Protocol [was: Syntax] is API Fallacy
• Previous by thread: RE: Do I need to use a validating parser?
• Next by thread: RDF Schema Question: adding new domains to a property?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread