On Sun, 2 Mar 2008 14:08:48 +0100 "Mojca Miklavec" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 2, 2008 at 9:48 AM, Marcin Borkowski wrote: > > > (And I really don't know what advantages in terms of XML I would get...) > > About 10 times easier to write definitions to "transform" XML into a > valid ConTeXt document (to write definitions in such a way that > ConTeXt will "understand" the XML) ... But it's true that XML parsing > is not 100% stable yet. It is not always easier to write a conversion from XML to TeX, I have a module with delimited arguments and it was easy to transform the XMl code to TeX but this is very difficult for me to do this with MkIV code. The old conversion methos requires for simple commands also less lines than the new method. The real advandtage for me is to avoid dozen of \defineXMLsave commands with the new XML setups and option to access data from the tree without the need to save the whole file in TeX macros (\saveXMLdatainelement). Wolfgang ___________________________________________________________________________________ If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki! maillist : [email protected] / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context webpage : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net archive : https://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/ wiki : http://contextgarden.net ___________________________________________________________________________________
