> Because with (@ attr1 val1 ...), you can retrive the attributes by
> just using (assoc '@ sxml).
> Is there any advantage of using your syntax @attr1 val1 ...?
advantage is that you don't have to put the attributes in a list
manually, your 'with-xml' function can do that for you;-)
>> Also, if you don't manage to hook your error handler to define the
>> tag functions "on-the-fly", you can always traverse the tree
>> argument of 'with-xml' and replace (or define) the tag symbols with
>> your generic tag function and then eval the whole tree.
> Good idea. Thanks :-)
On the other hand, 'with-xml' will then waste lot's of time traversing
all those trees (unless you get somehow clever, memoize the "replaced"
tree) so I would recommend to use @lib/xhtml.l if you use 'built-in'
html components or @lib/xml.l if your xml tags can be anything. With
your original approach, there is still danger Henrik emphasized, that
you can "overshadow" existing functions. The libraries above do not
have this problem.