Subject: RE: Is XML a Language? (was RE: [xsl] XSLT Architecture: Next Ste p) From: Bill Cohagan <bill.cohagan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2003 12:15:32 -0500 |
Didier says: ...Thinking about this subject this week end, I even more strongly believe that a meta language like XML is not a language per se but a structure used to create a language.... This argument could go on forever since clearly we are talking about differenct concepts of "language". I am taking the (Computer Science) formal language definition while you are apparently talking about a linguistic approach; i.e., "natural language". Obviously if we're talking about different concepts we're unlikely to come to agreement on a common "defintion". XML is most definitely a Context Free Language specified by a Context Free Grammar. It is also definitely NOT a natural language. BTW, I never actually saw my most recent post (the original "Is XML a Language?" post) although I've seen several responses to it (based on the "RE: Is XML..." subject line. Did my post actually appear? It's the one in which I referenced Aho, Sethi, et al. as well as the w3c specification of XML. I also asked: "What's the "L" in XML?" That I've received no response from Didier on this post also makes me wonder if it somehow wandered into the ether. Regards, Bill XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] XSLT encoding problem, Mike Brown | Thread | RE: Is XML a Language? (was RE: [xs, Didier PH Martin |
Re: Re: Re: RE: [xsl] number total , David Carlisle | Date | RE: [xsl] Using XSLT to add markup , Wendell Piez |
Month |