Re: Language choice (was: Re: Interactive XML)

["Mitch C. Amiano" <amiamc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

The tone of this note is off base. XML is SGML. SGML is for interchanging information. That one or more people might believe it worth investigating the use of SGML for encoding detailed structures of a style sheet is quite legitimate. The obtuse criticisim that the effort is misguided because it doesn't try to overload C syntax, is not, IMHO, a legitimately stated concern.

Michael Kay wrote:

> >take your pick.  about the only one that convinces me is
> >
> >6. XSL is written in XML
> >
> And that is an even sadder joke. XML was designed for
> marking-up documents, not for defining the syntax of
> programming languages (even declarative ones).
>
> Give me F(X) rather than
> <FUNCTION><NAME>F</NAME><ARGUMENT>X</ARGUMENT></FUNCTION>
> any day of the week.
>
> Mike Kay
>
>  XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list


--
Mitch C. Amiano                                         amiamc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Technical Staff Member  Advanced Design Process Group  Alcatel Network Systems
Speaking only for myself, not a representation of Alcatel.


 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list