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

Re: Lx: compact syntax for XML

• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: Lx: compact syntax for XML
• From: "Thomas B. Passin" <tpassin@c...>
• Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2004 19:25:24 -0400
• In-reply-to: <2DACFB92-9188-11D8-8A0C-003065BB956E@a...>
• References: <2DACFB92-9188-11D8-8A0C-003065BB956E@a...>
• User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.5 (Windows/20040207)

Norman Gray wrote:

> Ah, but I don't want to make XML `quicker/faster' for the machines (the 
> other current thread here recognises that this is largely pointless in 
> the vast majority of cases).
> 
> I just want to make XML (specifically XSLT and occasional RDF) easier to 
> read and write, and a bit easier for my editor to grok helpfully (and 
> yes, I do use psgml).
> 

I think that Normal and I are on the same page about this.

> Thomas Passin's python-like syntax is nice, too, and similarly 
> isomorphic to standard XML.  The only difference is that Thomas's syntax 
> doesn't leap out of the page at me, whereas the lispish syntax does.  
> Thomas clearly does a lot more Python than I do, so maybe this is just a 
> matter of habits and training, but it's this sort of `visual 
> obviousness' that I'm after, that Lx has, and XML's angle brackets don't.
> 

It's exactly the opposite for me :-), plus I don't have to count closing 
brackets.  But to each his own, no need for those religous wars that 
sometimes break out.

Cheers,

Tom P

• References:
  • Re: Lx: compact syntax for XML
    • From: Norman Gray <norman@a...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Lx: compact syntax for XML
• Next by Date: RE: Validation vs performance - was Re: Fast text output from SAX?
• Previous by thread: Re: Lx: compact syntax for XML
• Next by thread: RE: Lx: compact syntax for XML
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread