Lists Home |
Date Index |
- From: Robert La Quey <email@example.com>
- To: "Clark C. Evans" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Sun, 28 Nov 1999 15:39:26 -0800
At 04:21 AM 11/28/99 -0500, you wrote:
>On Fri, 26 Nov 1999, Don Park wrote:
>> I believe it is now time to address the question of
>> whether Attribute should be supported in SML or not.
> Attributes cannot be eliminated without
> providing a suitable replacement.
> The reason why SGML/XML/SML is so powerful is
> that it accurately reflects the dual nature
> of reality. Code has two aspects -- it is
> edited as data and run as instructions.
> This pattern is recursive. Witness yet another
> compiler ("yacc"), it is code which instructs the
> generation of code.
Now you are starting to cook. The only way to model reality
is to allow the recursion (although it is mostly tail recursion
and could be be converted to iteration) ...
Truncate it if we must but allow it.
(name, value) is the equivalent of a pointer. Next
SML must allow all possible data structures to be built easily without
arbitrary and artificial interference. Objects and their markup follow.
This is why I am in favour of SML with no attributes and as
Didder PH Martin notes a single data model (name,value) or
abstract pointer. The real bang from simplication comes from
simplifying and clarifying the stuff that goes on top.
Time to move the discussion up a notch in abstraction as
you have done.
Bob La Quey
xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:email@example.com
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To unsubscribe, mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org the following message;
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:email@example.com the following message;
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org)