Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
>> >> > A language for describing the syntax of another language? >> >> Despite the L in XML, syntax alone does not constitute a language. > > Agreed. > >> It's only a language if there are words. XML doesn't define >> words. It is a language because it has a grammar. And it is a language because it gives that grammar semantics: the start and end-tag and the contents form an element; the numerical character reference is interpreted as a charaacter and so on. A thin language perhaps. So it is a language even before we consider its use as a meta-language. The question of if it a language is bogus unless you say which area of discourse you are using, in any case. If people mean language in the formal CS/Chomsky usage, then it certainly is, because a formal language is a set of words or string. If people mean language in some sense of it being how humans communicate, then good luck to us all in deciding what is in and out. Cheers Rick Jelliffe
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] |
