3 ms·
it also "...does not have all the legacy things like DTD." Ok sure, but does it have schematron,rng, or some sort of validation? How about transformations? Xpa
by mgr86 9y ago
it also "...does not have all the legacy things like DTD."
Ok sure, but does it have schematron,rng, or some sort of validation? How about transformations? Xpath?
- henryluo 9y agoYes, I explicitly cut out DTD. I'm planning to developed a schema language for Mark, improving on prior art like XML Schema, JSON Schema, etc. There's already a transformation library - Mark Template (https://github.com/henry-luo/mark-template https://github.com/henry-luo/mark-template) in beta release. Mark at the moment supports CSS selector. I'm also thinking about a new Mark-specific selector. Mark is very new. A lot to be done!
- stephen 9y agoI'm enough of a type-safety bigot that I would have started with schema-first, as I want schemas for all the things. :-) FWIW, I would suggest avoiding the (IMO) mistake of using your markup language for the schema. E.g. like json-schemas where we need a "properties" map, "type": "string" (how many times do I have to type "type"), all sorts of syntactical overhead. Personally, I think IDLs are much cleaner, as you can design a purpose-specific grammar. More work up front, and you don't get a parser for free, but again personally I think it's more pleasant in the long-run for developers to read and write. Granted, not sure how that jives with your lisp/etc. way of thinking, but my two cents. Good luck!