|parsing non-XML to DOM -- "XML without all the angle brackets" firstname.lastname@example.org (2002-03-09)|
|Re: parsing non-XML to DOM -- "XML without all the angle brackets" email@example.com (Karl M. Syring) (2002-03-11)|
|Re: parsing non-XML to DOM -- "XML without all the angle brackets" firstname.lastname@example.org (Joachim Durchholz) (2002-03-11)|
|From:||Joachim Durchholz <email@example.com>|
|Date:||11 Mar 2002 02:16:04 -0500|
|Posted-Date:||11 Mar 2002 02:16:04 EST|
Robert Dodier wrote:
> What is a good way to approach this problem?
What's the problem you're trying to attack?
I'd say that readability is better with your style, in particular if
formatted with proper indenting. It's also easier to write - it's very
near to the expression syntax of functional languages (the only serious
difference being that these commonly use parentheses instead of braces -
easier to type on non-US keyboards and nearer to mathematical
conventions, but that's a side issue).
I'm not sure how well your syntax accommocates constraints and all the
other special XML stuff, but if extensions in that direction are needed
they're probably straightforward.
The really interesting question is what to do with that syntax. You
won't make the W3 consortium your syntax. You might be able to use it in
your personal tools (e.g. as an editable representation of XML, to be
translated to and from XML as appropriate).
Hope this helps
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.