Lists Home |
Date Index |
- To: Paul Alagna <email@example.com>
- Subject: Re: [xml-dev] Source Code Markup Language? - my attempts
- From: Daniel Schierbeck <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 20:45:32 +0100
- Cc: email@example.com
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=k9HYrFsG6JDCqW/54v0URCiijnCo6/WsWJdOuNCdZK/I/GlyMo5sepNA+9DllwrK9Q+jIDAtbWJo6jZ36T4BhHfGQ8cnVi8AUc5vim09QUBNMHqYole4nLkOnfdbVz37mb2CqKj83saQ9CXEmbwARnyNC+wRwuJ2HjwM5doBnRA=
- In-reply-to: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- References: <email@example.com>
- User-agent: Thunderbird 1.5 (X11/20051201)
I was only thinking about simple markup, something you would use with
syntax highlighting. Otherwise it'll be too complex.
Paul Alagna wrote:
> as a linguist I have tried to create xsd's for simple
> formula recording. the problems just come out of the
> simple recursion (A calls A) was a real issue until
> XML 2.0 standard solved that one. with the caveat
> that it could only be tail recursion. A-CA recursion
> (A calls B calls C calls A) is still a problem.
> overloading is another issue. when you say variable do
> you mean string variable? function variable? numeric?
> the xsd and xml demands you spell all that out. depth
> is another problem. xml wants to know what to expect
> at every level if you say a function can have
> parameters can those parameters BE functions? can they
> have parameters?...
> as you can tell, I'm very interested too.
> Paul Alagna - CTO - CheckMi
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around