[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: DTD formal syntax
- From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@ingr.com>
- To: Alaric Snell <alaric@alaric-snell.com>, The Deviants <xml-dev@lists.xml.org>
- Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2001 08:55:49 -0500
The only bubble burst is the logical one. You
are comparing an application language to the
metalanguage. If you say XHTML is harder to
learn than HTML, you are comparing apples to
apples. Given that HTML systems are usually
tag stackers, and that HTML itself is fairly
close to RTF in terms of having minimal structure,
you are probably right.
On the other hand, that is meaningless. The
features have to suit the task. HTML was
designed for formatted email with hot links.
Then came forms and the GUI was mixed into
the document, then came objects and the
operating system began to be more intertwined
and so it goes. The diamond in the set may
be obscured by all the emeralds in the setting.
I have built macro-driven editors in Word
for markup. It is a royal pain in the patootie.
On the other hand, using MS Access, exporting
RTF or XML is actually not too hard because one
can take the InfoSet abstractions and treat them
like system tables and derive the rest. Given
the DOM and a Schema, it becomes a piece of
cake.
Weirdly, after some time, they go to editing
in the ASCII editor again. If the elements
and attributes are named reasonably, and they
know their subject domain, they can do it and
will. If they are just creating memos, they
are using the wrong tools anyway.
Clay is hard to model with if you can't
use knives. Snowmen are easy,
but the Tonka truck is a pain.
Len
http://www.mp3.com/LenBullard
Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h
-----Original Message-----
From: Alaric Snell [mailto:alaric@alaric-snell.com]
Quoting Marcus Carr <mrc@allette.com.au>:
> > Like I said
> > XMLSpy (and probably others I am unaware of) provides this,
> > but I want more control over the data entry format.
>
> This sounds as though it verges on a fully-blown guided syntax editor,
> but with a very configurable GUI - I don't think you'll find such a
> thing.
I've seen it done; a client of the consultancy I work at wanted to work with
an
XML DTD but their people weren't particularly programmerish and couldn't
handle
hand coding XML (sorry to burst any bubbles, folks, but XML *is* more
complex
than HTML in the eyes of non-technical users, we have found..