[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Rules & Grammars
- From: John Cowan <email@example.com>
- To: Tim Bray <firstname.lastname@example.org>, XML Developers List <email@example.com>
- Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 09:28:33 -0500
Tim Bray wrote:
> I think we can
> all agree that learning schema languages is hard.
Not at all.
TREX is spectacularly easy to learn. RELAX is only a bit
harder, and then only if you want to learn all of it.
Hook is probably a snap, although I admit I don't quite
grok its semantics yet.
XML Schema, OTOH: why *that* is so hard that I fear I'm unable.
If you pile rule-based stuff onto the already overreaching
Tower of Babel, you might well get a pile of rubble.
> Once we've
> figured out what we want to do, therefore, fewer schema languages
> are better then more, so that everyone has less to learn.
Why don't we abandon Perl, Python, Java, C, C++, and Lisp and
just go back to writing all programs in PL/I, the last universal
programming language? That way we'll all have less to learn too.
> So I say to you all: go back in your caves and come out with
> *one* schema facility that lets me write grammars when I want
> to and xpath expressions when I want to, and has an elegantly
> unified syntax. Then declare victory.
Is this a troll??!
There is / one art || John Cowan <firstname.lastname@example.org>
no more / no less || http://www.reutershealth.com
to do / all things || http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
with art- / lessness \\ -- Piet Hein