[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
Re: [xml-dev] SGML complexity
- From: "bryan rasmussen" <rasmussen.bryan@gmail.com>
- To: "juanrgonzaleza@canonicalscience.com" <juanrgonzaleza@canonicalscience.com>
- Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2006 11:30:30 +0200
>
> > The first two points are widely accepted.
>
> And the points were:
>
> > - XML is more verbose than some other markup languages
> > - XSL may not be the best choice for every programming task
>The third point was:
>
> > - XSL may or may not be a programming language
Well, that may not be a programming language would certainly explain
why in point two it may not be the best choice for every programming
task.
So one possible set of arguments - with conclusions - could be
1. XSL may or may not be a programming language -> conclusion: XSL is
not a programming language
2. XSL may not be the best choice for every programming task -> XSL
may be the best choice for every programming task -> conclusion: XSL
is the best choice for every programming task
1+ 2->conclusion: XSL, which is not a programming language, is the
best choice for every programming task.
That's canonical. not as in relating to established rules, but rather
as in having the shape of a canon.
Cheers,
Bryan Rasmussen
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]