Re: Configuration management, revision 3
On Thu, Jul 30, 1998 at 01:05:55PM +0200, Ronald van Loon wrote:
> How about XML ? It's rather easy to parse, to extend etc. Just
> define a bunch of tags and attributes, and le voila. Done.
On the one hand, as XML is a metalanguage, you would still be defining
a new language. No gain from that perspective.
On the other hand, XML is a subset of SGML and thus it is easily
picked up by a HTML literate person. This is an advantage.
On the one foot (I only have two hands you know :-), the language you
described is verbose. My hands will be aching after typing in a
nontrivial config setup.
On the other foot, your language seems to be semantically equivalent
to mine. No gain, but no pain either.
> The advantage of XML is that it's easily embedded in HTML.
Why would you want to embed a configuration setup in HTML?
> It has the added advantage that instead of non-descript brackets
> such as in LISP, we have a clue as to what opening and closing
> brackets actually do.
Well, the LISP parentheses have only one function: they delimit
functional expressions. Therefore they don't need any descriptions.
Antti-Juhani
--
Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho <gaia@iki.fi> ** <URL:http://www.iki.fi/gaia/> **
I can't seem to find a lowercase 'r' on my keyboard.
(Lee Davies in comp.unix.programmer on July 22, 1998)
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: