OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help



   Re: [xml-dev] S-expressions vs. XML

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]

> You don't have an isomorphism yet, since the range
> of g (hence the domain of f) is only a subset of all
> S-expressions over atoms and strings.  But that's fixable.

I knew I shouldn't have deleted the first part of my message.

I believe most folks are being sloppy.  They don't really mean a 1:1
mapping, they mean:  "why have XML syntax since we can easily map that
into s-expr's"

So I consider the problem solved. :)

> Then h(x) includes the element node "<bar a='b'>world</bar>"
> and the text node "!".  There's no f :: S-Exp -> XML that
> can satisfy h(x) = h(f(g(x))), since g(x) is just the
> string 'hello'.

I was going for well-formed XML documents, not fragments.
The XML1.0 spec doesn't talk about fragments.

But if you really want all that stuff, then push things down a level,
defining top-level forms of element, node, and progn. :)


News | XML in Industry | Calendar | XML Registry
Marketplace | Resources | MyXML.org | Sponsors | Privacy Statement

Copyright 2001 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS