On Fri, 9 Dec 2011 12:26:29 +0100 Leif Middelschulte <leif.middelschu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2011/12/9 Tom Hacohen <t...@stosb.com>: > > On 09/12/11 04:18, David Seikel wrote: > >> As I understand it, text tags are entirely up to the developer > >> using the API to define for themselves. They are completely free > >> to use what ever works for them. They are opaque tags, and could > >> be any damn thing the developer wants. > >> > >> XML should not be encouraged, it's a solution in search of a > >> problem that has yet to find any problems it's actually a good > >> match for. In the mean time, it's been applied to many things it > >> should never have been used for, coz people think it solves the > >> most important, top priority, bugger anything else "problem" of > >> being "human readable". Most XML data never has humans read it. > >> Lots of XML is not human readable anyway. Most XML just takes up > >> more space, takes more time and resources for computers to parse, > >> takes more time and uses more bandwidth travelling from one > >> computer to the next, and generally just wasting every ones > >> resources. > >> > >> On the other hand, being somewhat similar to HTML might be a good > >> thing for text tags. It's a similar sort of thing that lots of > >> people are familiar with for a similar sort of job. HTML is not > >> XML. It looks a lot like XML, there is a subset that tries to be > >> XML compatible, but HTML is not XML. > >> > >> In the end though, it's up to developers using the API to decide > >> for themselves what text tags they will use in their own projects, > >> isn't it? They may choose to use completely human unreadable > >> symbols, with zero similarity to XML, for their text tags, for > >> their own reasons, secure in the knowledge that for their own app, > >> their odd choice of symbols is of no consequence. That's > >> certainly the way I read the documentation when I was using the > >> edje API that wraps evas for my own application. Then again, that > >> documentation left me guessing a few things. > >> > >> I certainly don't think XML should be forced on people. Or HTML > >> for that matter. > I didn't mean to bring up a XML discussion here ;-) Didn't want to > imply our text markup uses XML. Just that </foo> is an (in the world > of XML terminology) "empty tag", which is also valid XML. This does > not mean it isn't a "dog" in parallel universe. So please don't > discuss the pros and cons of dogs ;-) Meh, I'm a cat person myself. Never did like dogs much. -- A big old stinking pile of genius that no one wants coz there are too many silver coated monkeys in the world.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Cloud Services Checklist: Pricing and Packaging Optimization This white paper is intended to serve as a reference, checklist and point of discussion for anyone considering optimizing the pricing and packaging model of a cloud services business. Read Now! http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51491232/
_______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
