3 ms·
I've never seen SXML before, but that looks way worse. All of Lisp's frustration of trying to match closing parens with none of Lisp's power.
by mi100hael 10y ago
I've never seen SXML before, but that looks way worse. All of Lisp's frustration of trying to match closing parens with none of Lisp's power.
- mixedCase 10y agoAs opposed to closing tags? All decent text editors have matching parens highlighting. SXML is much easier to parse and it's more concise.
- tannhaeuser 10y agoHTML itself allows SGML-style tag omission since HTML was originally an application of SGML. A simple example can be found at [1], and can also be seen in action in my talk slides linked from [2]. [1] http://sgmljs.net/docs/html5.html#tag-omission-on-document-level-elements http://sgmljs.net/docs/html5.html#tag-omission-on-document-l... [2] http://sgmljs.net/blog/blog1701.html http://sgmljs.net/blog/blog1701.html
- mixedCase 10y agoWe're talking XML rather than HTML (and omitting certain closing tags isn't compliant HTML5 anyway). In XML there's also the concept of using self-closing tags only for "empty tags". Meaning, <tagname val="123"/> isn't "correct" and <tagname>123</tagname> should be used instead; while s-expressions simplify this.
- tannhaeuser 10y agoSorry but your comment re XML is incorrect. I suggest you study the HTML and XML specs, especially if want to convince us of an alternate XML serialization.