|
|
Re: [xml-dev] poisoned markup
|
[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
In a message dated 2/2/2003 8:40:02 PM Central Standard Time, simonstl@simonstl.com writes:
rsalz@datapower.com (Rich Salz) writes:
>So, you're pissed off that someone took your simplified markup tool
>and used it for other things?
Re-use is fine. Re-creation in a different image is obnoxious.
In this case, that "someone" has come back to modify the original well
from which they took water with "supplements" that may seem great to
them but are toxic to others.
I'm not exactly sure why people expect that I (and they) should just sit
around while the toxicity increases.
Well, I know that one point contention is that some of us see "types" when we see "<a href="something">text</a> where other people see only "markup". Quite frankly, I am only amused when I see people rebel against the assertion that the "a" element has a "type". Granted, I use an "XML framework" that is created according to what I want "to see", http://celtic.benderweb.net/webit/, most of the "XML programming" that I do would break without a notion of "types". Equally, the views of others don't really affect what I do in Scheme;) If XML is only markup, party on!
To those interested in that, "filthy", programming languages point-of-view, I offer some examples of interesting XML transformations on the WebIt! mailing list:
http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum=webit-discuss
These examples depend on "programming languages" notations of state-passing, most notably that of "monads". (These transformations are expressed in the Scheme language.)
Jim Bender
|
|
|
|
|
|