cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From giacomo <giac...@apache.org>
Subject RE: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources
Date Sun, 16 Dec 2001 22:14:10 GMT
On Sun, 16 Dec 2001, Gerhard Froehlich wrote:

> >From: Stefano Mazzocchi [mailto:stefano@apache.org]
> >
> >
> >giacomo wrote:
> >
> >> Well, I have not made myself clear enough. In XML you can control
> >> verbosity by DTD/XSchemas/aggreed syntax. The ones controlling the
> >> Schemas define the verbosity. In programming language nothing
> >> prevents you choosing non-verbose names but in XML we control by
> >> Schema the names of elements and attributes.
> >
> >Yes, but not the attributes (unless you want to extend your own schema
> >datatypes).
> >
> >I mean, your schema defines the tag names, just like the language syntax
> >defines keywords.
> >
> >Then, languages doesn't (normally) rule what variable names you can
> >choose, as well as you can't force attribute values (or validate them).
> >
> >Sure, you might say that we also define the dynamic elements, but this
> >is like providing verbose API for your language: you might call
> >meaningful API and still do crappy programming.
> >
> >Let me show you examples of both:
> >
> > VerboseObject a = VerboseLibraryFactory.createVerboseObject();
> > VerboseValue b = a.getValue();
> > int c = b.doSomething();
> >
> >which is just like
> >
> > <map:generator type="a" class="my.own.component"/>
> > ...
> > <map:generate type="a" src="/whatever"/>
> >
> >I fail to see what XML validation adds to this picture.
> >
> >> > I can tell you for sure, that both couldn't have used DSSSL because the
> >> > unknown syntax would have been too much of a gap for them.
> >>
> >> Hey, buddy. Why are you trying to convice me that XSLT isn't the right
> >> way to express program logic? I nor anybody else here ever stated to
> >> stick with XSLT. I don't understand your digression here. I've simply
> >> said that, using your words, that the "web tech population nowadays"
> >> understand HTML so there isn't a big step to understand XML and have a
> >> syntax that is "procedural" to express logic for flowmaps and I meant
> >> that Scheme isn't popular in the "web tech population nowadays" sdo I'm
> >> -1 using Scheme syntax. Point.
> >
> >uh, uh, getting mad :)
> >
> >Look, I don't like the Scheme syntax as much as you do: without a
> >specific editor, it's simply impossible write, so forget about that, I
> >would oppose it as well.
> >
> >My point is: since the flowmaps will very likely require lots of code
> >and very few markup content (actually, should have *NONE*), why
> >shouldn't we use a code-oriented syntax for them?
> >
> >I would replace 'code-oriented' syntax with JavaScript (since we have
> >parsers available) or any syntax that we can agree on (but i don't see
> >the need reinvent the wheel)
>
> IMHO don't use XML to create a programming language.

And IMHO we havn't seen the real need for a programming language to
describe a flowmap (and this thread *is* about flowmaps):

Giacomo

> "The Extensible Markup Language (XML) is the universal
> format for structured documents and data on the Web."
> -- W3C XML Web site, 2000-07-06
>
> Exactly for _documents_ and in further sense for data!
>
> A little story:
> For the AvalonDB we started to define our own SQL in XML,
> because we thought that writing a full fledged SQL Parser
> is really hard. But what we done was to re-inventing the wheel.
> We had to make decision about the syntax, semantic and s.o.
> But the syntax for SQL is there. I don't know, since 20 years?
> Then I started to write my own SQL Parser with JavaCC. And wow
> one week later most of the parser was implemented. Writing
> a own Syntax in BNF Grammer or whatever isn't that hard!
> Parsing the "where" condition was easier to implement with JavaCC
> as in XML!!
>
> This JavaScript idea I like. There are good parser around and
> look at:
> http://www-124.ibm.com/developerworks/projects/bsf
>
> Do not mix up with BSE ;-))
>
> my 2 Cents
>
>   Gerhard
>
> -----------------------------------------------------
> That must be wonderful! I don't understand it at all.
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
> For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
>
>
>
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org


Mime
View raw message