On Sun, February 4, 2007 5:02 pm, Steven E. Harris wrote:
> Christian Seberino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> Since there is no good reason to *allow* improper indentation why
>> not *mandate* it then?
>
> When I write software that produces XML, it produces no indentation or
> superfluous whitespace. Adding the indentation back in to well-formed
> XML (or sexps or any similarly hierarchical structure) for display
> purposes is always possible.
>
> Also, I don't understand the "paren hell" remark about
> s-expressions. In Emacs, editing s-expressions in lisp-related mode
> involves the commands `insert-parentheses' and
> `move-past-close-and-reindent', not the commands to place literal '('
> and ')' characters. That is, the commands themselves enforce balanced
> editing. It's not possible to mess up the structure without
> deliberately trying. The same goes for the SGML/XML Emacs modes.I'm glad Emacs indents Lisp/XML code nicely. But there is no rule that you must hack Lisp and XML with Emacs. There will always be some knucklehead that will mess up indentation and forget closing tags. Validation already does not let our knucklehead avoid closing tags. Why not also make validation force knucklehead to indent properly too? -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
