[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Norman Gray wrote:
> Ah, but I don't want to make XML `quicker/faster' for the machines (the
> other current thread here recognises that this is largely pointless in
> the vast majority of cases).
>
> I just want to make XML (specifically XSLT and occasional RDF) easier to
> read and write, and a bit easier for my editor to grok helpfully (and
> yes, I do use psgml).
>
I think that Normal and I are on the same page about this.
> Thomas Passin's python-like syntax is nice, too, and similarly
> isomorphic to standard XML. The only difference is that Thomas's syntax
> doesn't leap out of the page at me, whereas the lispish syntax does.
> Thomas clearly does a lot more Python than I do, so maybe this is just a
> matter of habits and training, but it's this sort of `visual
> obviousness' that I'm after, that Lx has, and XML's angle brackets don't.
>
It's exactly the opposite for me :-), plus I don't have to count closing
brackets. But to each his own, no need for those religous wars that
sometimes break out.
Cheers,
Tom P
|
