[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
On Monday 28 October 2002 11:09 pm, Simon St.Laurent wrote:
> Given that XML came pretty completely out of the SGML community, I don't
> think it's surprising that they felt SGML had a lot to offer. There may
> be a few exceptions, but for the most part I think it's fair to say that
> these people were immersed in SGML.
Pah! One of my pet peeves, things that were designed by "Hmmm, we have a
hammer, what looks like a nail?" :-)
> Now if the ASN.1 community had had a similar idea... maybe they will
> yet.
It's been bandied about. I'm quite keen on defining a new notation for ASN.1
types that semantically the same as the existing one but:
1) Has an ASN.1 abstract syntax of its own, eg a data model beyond just
what's implicit in the BNF of the specification
And probably but not necessarily, since this may be satisfiable by just using
XER with (1):
2) Has a nice easy to parse syntax for people to read
And possibly:
3) Doesn't bother with supporting the syntax for deprecated types; I see
"keeping it simple" as more important than "allowing ancient specs to be
brought into it without updating them".
Oooh, I've just had a fun idea; SER, sexpr encoding rules, which fill a
similar niche to XER but are less Alaric-angering... that'd be a workable
solution for (2) in my book of nested parenthesis!
ABS
--
Oh, pilot of the storm who leaves no trace, Like thoughts inside a dream
Heed the path that led me to that place, Yellow desert screen
|
