[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
Re: [xml-dev] [RFC] "Shlomi =?UTF-8?B?RmlzaOKAmXM=?= FAQ - Why areyou still using XML?"
- From: Shlomi Fish <shlomif@shlomifish.org>
- To: Jim DeLaHunt <list+xml-dev@jdlh.com>
- Date: Wed, 18 May 2022 18:21:47 +0300
Hi Jim,
On Tue, 17 May 2022 23:48:33 -0700
Jim DeLaHunt <list+xml-dev@jdlh.com> wrote:
> Shlomi:
>
> On 2022-05-17 5:47 a.m., Shlomi Fish wrote:
> > hi all,
> >
> > seehttps://www.shlomifish.org/meta/FAQ/why_xml.xhtml :
> > …[snip]…
> > what do you think?
>
> I think that I am glad you articulated these reasons. They overlap with
> my reasons, and your words help me explain myself to my skeptics.
>
I'm glad.
> However, when you wrote this:
>
> > Now, with respect to HTML 5, the Markdowns and AsciiDoc, while I use them
> > sometimes, they are less structured and more errorprone than many XML
> > grammars, and often are not semantic enough for all my use cases.
>
> … my first reaction was, are you using an XML-aware editor to do your
> data entry? Because one source of pushback against XML languages and in
> favour of markdowns and AsciiDoc, which I encounter in projects, is the
> assumption that we can only expect authors to use plain text editors,
> with no XML syntax support. And in a plain text editor, I think it
> genuinely is easier — /less/ errorprone — to author in a markdown
> language or in AsciiDoc.
>
I use gvim and neovim with plugins and customisations:
* https://www.shlomifish.org/meta/FAQ/text_editors.xhtml
*
https://github.com/shlomif/shlomif-computer-settings/blob/master/shlomif-settings/vim-conf/conf-Vim/shlomif-main.vim
no idea if my config can be called 'XML-aware'.
the syntax/grammar of asciidoctor and markdowns are finicky and unpredictable
when authored using vim, from my experience.
> Also, the complement to "less structured" is "less complex". I know one
> project where some doc maintainers are proposing switching away from the
> XML-based DocBook language, to AsciiDoc, because there are so many
> entities and "more structured" capabilities that it is complex to figure
> out for a casual contributor. These maintainers judge that it is better
> to have less structure but to be accessible to casual contributors of
> documentation improvements.
>
I'm not a purist in using the most semantic elements [whether in docbook 5 or
in XHTML5]. Also, often having a higher barrier for entry is advantageous :
*
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Road#A_metaphorical_%22Royal_Road%22_in_famous_quotations
*
https://www.shlomifish.org/philosophy/philosophy/putting-cards-on-the-table-2019-2020/#selling-for-stupider-ppl
there is the flip side too, though:
* https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2002/04/02/20020402/
> You might want to consider addressing these points in your essay.
>
> I hope this is the kind of helpful feedback you are looking for.
>
It is. thanks!
> Best regards,
> —Jim DeLaHunt
>
--
Shlomi Fish https://www.shlomifish.org/
Star Trek: “We, the Living Dead” - https://shlom.in/st-wtld
If Chuck Norris travelled to the market with his son and his donkey, he would
have clubbed the critics to death. With the donkey.
— https://www.shlomifish.org/humour/bits/facts/Chuck-Norris/
Please reply to list if it's a mailing list post - https://shlom.in/reply .
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]