• To: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• Subject: Re: XUL Compact Syntax Study Now Online - Is XML too ha rd for Aunt Trudie?
• From: Bob Foster <bob@o...>
• Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2004 16:00:25 -0500
• Cc: 'Tom Gaven' <Tom.Gaven@e...>,'xml-dev' <xml-dev@l...>
• In-reply-to: <15725CF6AFE2F34DB8A5B4770B7334EE03F9F675@h...>
• References: <15725CF6AFE2F34DB8A5B4770B7334EE03F9F675@h...>
• User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007

Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:
 > Syntax is not trivial.

You seem to be saying that the world would be a better place if 
everything were expressed in XML syntax, because we've all learned it. I 
don't think so. I would be surprised if you thought so.

If on the other hand, you mean that because notation is important as a 
vehicle for thought syntax should be tailored to be appropriate to the 
application and the intended audience, then I would heartily agree. 
Syntax is not trivial.

Bob Foster
http://xmlbuddy.com/

• References:
  • RE: XUL Compact Syntax Study Now Online - Is XML too ha rd for Aunt Trudie?
    • From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>

• Prev by Date: RE: XUL Compact Syntax Study Now Online - Is XML too ha rd for Aunt Trudie?
• Next by Date: Does anyone know of a mailing list for java and xml?
• Previous by thread: RE: XUL Compact Syntax Study Now Online - Is XML too ha rd for Aunt Trudie?
• Next by thread: RE: XUL Compact Syntax Study Now Online - Is XML too ha rd for Aunt Trudie?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread