469,358 Members | 1,577 Online
Bytes | Developer Community
New Post

Home Posts Topics Members FAQ

Post your question to a community of 469,358 developers. It's quick & easy.

XML for Coders (XFC)

Don't know how many other proposals like that are
circulating on the web - if anybody cares: this is mine :)

If some of you like it, i'll write a SAX parser and a converter!

?processingInstruction( text )

?xml(version="1.0")

elementName(attributeName="text" otherAttributeName='5')
{
subElementName(){} // should allow to remove empty () ?
// emptyElement{} // we also could remove empty {} and terminate with ';'
// emptyElement;
// emptyElement(attrib="");
"text"
'text: "Hello World!"'
}
// Single-line comment
/*
Multi-line comment
*/

![CDATA([ Some CDATA ])]

!DOCTYPE(greeting SYSTEM "hello.dtd")

!DOCTYPE( greeting [
!ELEMENT( greeting (#PCDATA))
])
!ENTITY(myEnt "x") // should we support entities ???

//Simple replacement for external entities:
[URI]

element(attrib="1<2")
{
"No special handling of '<>&%^'!"
}
NameSpace:element(AttributeNamespace:atrib="text") {}

html(xmlns='http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40')
{
head()
{
title(){"Page Title"}
}
body()
{
p(){ "Go " a(href='http://www.bouncingbytes.at'){"here"} }
}
}

Jul 20 '05 #1
10 1709
hehe. looks fancy ;)
but probably only c++-syntax supportes will like it ;)
Jul 20 '05 #2
It's all a bit like terse xml, except that yours is quite verbose for no good
reason that i can determine. You are just swapping one, verbose, syntax for
another.

How about this...

?text

elementName attributeName=text otherAttributeName=5
{
subElementName
"text"
}

html xmlns=http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40
{
head
{
title attribute='this needs to be in quotes' {"Page Title"}
}
!comment
body
{
p{ "Go " a href=http://www.bouncingbytes.at {"here"} }
}
}

I'm sure you can see the syntax and it is less 'just looks like C++/Java' that
people might find off putting. The purpose of a new version of xml is, surely,
to provide some improvement for some usage of xml rather than just another syntax.

The purpose of terse xml is just that, be terse without being obscure.

Jul 20 '05 #3
This is *not* XML -- do not use "XML" in the name of your language to avoid
any confusion.
Dimitre Novatchev.

FXSL developer, XML Insider,
http://fxsl.sourceforge.net/ -- the home of FXSL

"Erik Unger" <Er********@gmx.at> wrote in message
news:3f********@e-post.inode.at...
Don't know how many other proposals like that are
circulating on the web - if anybody cares: this is mine :)

If some of you like it, i'll write a SAX parser and a converter!

?processingInstruction( text )

?xml(version="1.0")

elementName(attributeName="text" otherAttributeName='5')
{
subElementName(){} // should allow to remove empty () ?
// emptyElement{} // we also could remove empty {} and terminate with ';' // emptyElement;
// emptyElement(attrib="");
"text"
'text: "Hello World!"'
}
// Single-line comment
/*
Multi-line comment
*/

![CDATA([ Some CDATA ])]

!DOCTYPE(greeting SYSTEM "hello.dtd")

!DOCTYPE( greeting [
!ELEMENT( greeting (#PCDATA))
])
!ENTITY(myEnt "x") // should we support entities ???

//Simple replacement for external entities:
[URI]

element(attrib="1<2")
{
"No special handling of '<>&%^'!"
}
NameSpace:element(AttributeNamespace:atrib="text") {}

html(xmlns='http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40')
{
head()
{
title(){"Page Title"}
}
body()
{
p(){ "Go " a(href='http://www.bouncingbytes.at'){"here"} }
}
}

Jul 20 '05 #4
Dimitre Novatchev wrote:
This is *not* XML -- do not use "XML" in the name of your language to avoid
any confusion.


The syntax is not XML but the semantic is.
So how should i call it ?
Another Alternative Syntax for XML-like Meta Semantic (AASFXLMS) ?
But here XML is still in the name...

-Erik

Jul 20 '05 #5
arachno wrote:
hehe. looks fancy ;)
but probably only c++-syntax supportes will like it ;)


Or Java, C# and all other {}-language coders,
which are a small minority on this planet ;)

-Erik

Jul 20 '05 #6
Peter Hickman wrote:
It's all a bit like terse xml, except that yours is quite verbose for no
good reason that i can determine.
Many coders are used to reading such a C-like syntax!
How about this...

elementName attributeName=text otherAttributeName=5
{
subElementName
"text"
}
Looks nice too. But parentheses around attributes can help
making the syntax more clear (and easier to parse).
The purpose of terse xml is just that, be terse without being obscure.


OK. My goal is a (for humans and especially programmers) more _readable_ syntax,
not a 'better' and/or mor terse syntax.

-Erik

Jul 20 '05 #7
Erik Unger wrote:
Don't know how many other proposals like that are
circulating on the web


Now I know at least the following list:

http://www.pault.com/pault/pxml/xmlalternatives.html

-Erik

Jul 20 '05 #8
Sorry,

I don't have time to discuss this as it is a non-xml topic.

Publish your proposal on the xml-dev list and see what happens :o) They
have a permalink on such proposals.

Hint: Try to find other such proposals and what was said about them on the
list. AFAIK none has succeeded.
Dimitre Novatchev.
FXSL developer, XML Insider,

http://fxsl.sourceforge.net/ -- the home of FXSL
Resume: http://fxsl.sf.net/DNovatchev/Resume/Res.html

"Erik Unger" <Er********@gmx.at> wrote in message
news:3f********@e-post.inode.at...
Dimitre Novatchev wrote:
This is *not* XML -- do not use "XML" in the name of your language to avoid any confusion.


The syntax is not XML but the semantic is.
So how should i call it ?
Another Alternative Syntax for XML-like Meta Semantic (AASFXLMS) ?
But here XML is still in the name...

-Erik

Jul 20 '05 #9
In article <3f********@e-post.inode.at>, Erik Unger <Er********@gmx.at> wrote:

% The syntax is not XML but the semantic is.

??? XML has no semantics. All it is is syntax.

If you want a terser input syntax for XML, why not use SGML?
--

Patrick TJ McPhee
East York Canada
pt**@interlog.com
Jul 20 '05 #10
Patrick TJ McPhee wrote:
In article <3f********@e-post.inode.at>, Erik Unger <Er********@gmx.at> wrote:

% The syntax is not XML but the semantic is.

??? XML has no semantics. All it is is syntax.
I know, but how should i call it ?
Meta-Syntax or, Semantic of the syntax... ;)
If you want a terser input syntax for XML, why not use SGML?


You have read the whole thread ?

and stop

-Erik

Jul 20 '05 #11

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.

Similar topics

reply views Thread by Willie Stewart | last post: by
reply views Thread by rebel | last post: by
1 post views Thread by jonano | last post: by
reply views Thread by chained | last post: by
reply views Thread by avguste | last post: by
1 post views Thread by ImCookieness | last post: by
1 post views Thread by Vangati | last post: by
1 post views Thread by CARIGAR | last post: by
reply views Thread by zhoujie | last post: by
reply views Thread by suresh191 | last post: by
1 post views Thread by Marylou17 | last post: by
By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.