Cart
|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Breaking whats fixed
 It seems to me that we would be better if LISP fans did for LISP what the JSON people did for JavaScript: make an minimal interchange syntax that was 100% compatible with LISP syntax and functionality. [The choice of which LISP dialect is left as an exercise for them :-) but it should be trivial apart from that.] Several proposals I have seen over the years are obviously LISP fans wanting to use S-expressions, and baffled why the obvious merits of the S-expression has not triumphed long ago. Then they wouldn't need to pretend it has anything to do with being a markup language (i.e. the technology tradition that is based on affording arbitrary and rigorous *annotation* of pre-existing text.) There is room for multiplicity, for meeting private expectations. XML is not broken just because it doesn't look like S-expressions, any more than S-expressions are broken because they don't look like XML, or than EXI is broken because we cannot even read it. (Which is not to say that XML would not benefit by hygenic short tags like </> being available, and that S-expressions would not benefit by some different syntax to signpost large or complex expressions: some churn is good.) Cheers Rick Jelliffe 
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] |
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! 
Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|
|||||||||
