[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
another set of overloaded symbols.
i guess if you only work in one language it's ok. but when you use 4 or
5 languages every day the symbol overload (and syntax for that matter)
starts to get me down. how many \ escape chars do i need to make this
symbol get through to the n'th parser (n-1?, n?, n+1?, etc).
rick
On Wed, 2004-04-21 at 03:42, Tom Gaven wrote:
> >Except there is one problem: At a given point you are
> >addicted. Strangely, though, all the RNC detox centers are empty.
>
> Problem? No, that's called 'shear joy'.
> .. and I think those centers are going to start filling up....
>
> BTW, here is a (complete?) list of RNC symbols, for those of you who wish to
> check in:
>
> () general purpose pattern grouping
> {} only used on element and attribute patterns,
> to enclose the entire content model of that element or attribute.
> | choice
> & interleave
> , sequence
> = only placed to the right hand side of a <define> name.
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike Fitzgerald [mailto:mikefz@wyeast.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2004 11:08 AM
> To: K. Ari Krupnikov; xml-dev
> Subject: Re: [xml-dev] XUL Compact Syntax Study Now Online - Is XML too hard
> for Aunt Trudie?
>
>
> K. Ari Krupnikov wrote:
> > Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@metalab.unc.edu> writes:
> >>At 4:25 AM -0400 4/16/04, Gerald Bauer wrote:
> >>>I wrote up the compact syntax study after reading
> >>>up on the compact (non-XML) syntax for Relax NG - a
> >>>schema language for XML. See http://www.relaxng.org
> >>>for details. In case of Relax NG the compact non-XML
> >>>syntax clearly beats the XML syntax.
> >>
> >>A lot of people feel that way. I don't though. I personally find the
> >>XML syntax to be significantly easier to read and understand than the
> >>RELAX NG compact syntax.
> >
> > I can second that. It's good that James gave us two alternatives, but
> > every time I have to read RNC, I have to go back and check what the
> > symbols mean. Admittedly, I don't read a lot of RNC, or I would have
> > learned the syntax. But as a causal user, I find the XML syntax a
> > better trade-off between "self-describing markup" and ease of
> > authoring. I doubt Aunt Trudie is a less causal user than I am :=)
>
> In my experience, once you're familiar with RELAX NG, the compact syntax
> becomes natural
> -- to the point that you don't want to live without it. In fact, I suspect
> that any RNG
> aficionados would much prefer RNC and can't go back to the XML syntax for
> one reason: It's
> much quicker to develop schemas by hand, once you have RNG in you back
> pocket. And
> twice-blessed by Trang, which can translate RNC to DTD, RNG, or XML Schema,
> you don't get
> yourself painted in a corner. Except there is one problem: At a given point
> you are
> addicted. Strangely, though, all the RNC detox centers are empty. %^}
>
> Mike
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an initiative
> of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>
>
> The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
> manager: <http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/index.php>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an
> initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>
>
> The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
> manager: <http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/index.php>
>
|
