Carlos: "And sadly there is a lot of people that also consider it as a programmin= g language"
I very much agree, from the opposite point of view , that is via XML as a= format. Originally processor instructions were allowed in XML, but more or less d= iscouraged. As a web substitute for adhoc HTML scripts were introduced haphazardly. I= n my opinion script has no place in a XML format, unless of course it is = used to render scripts into an editable and passive form. Where REBOL may have an important and simplifying contribution is in taki= ng scripts out of XML altogether. It depends very much on how a REBOL plugin might work in alien browsers. = Whether REBOL might become a rendering engine, or stylesheet processor of= some kind. I don't know if such a thing is even possible (well everything is possibl= e, but money and time might be excessive). Script actions belong not in XML but in a stylesheet that describes how t= he XML will be displayed and used. It is that simple. The stylesheet is a script, XML is a structural map. It should be used as= a map, and the script should identify where things might happen. Consider simple hypertext jumps. At the moment a URL is placed within the= XML as an button, which is handy, but in terms of structure does a refer= ence really need to be implanted, is it good practice? I don't think so, not when we have an established system of footnoting wh= ich places the references typographically separate from the reference poi= nt. It makes little difference to the web, but try printing it out while pres= erving the references =96 they disappear! Yet they could all be grouped traditionally within their own structure (h= idden in web use, but made visible when printing (perhaps at the bottom o= f the page, end of the section or end of the document =96 but not disappe= aring as is the case now). Put the code that attaches a reference to a web address in a stylesheet a= nd the link activation does exactly what a present href does, but the ref= erence itself is elsewhere =96 structurally separate. Same with ActiveX type controls =96 they don't have to be, and make littl= e sense in being in a printed version, inserted directly into the XML its= elf they are a mess to be placed in the rendered XML through a script mak= es more sense, at least to me. REBOL might provide the means of keeping data format clean and separate f= rom rendering and for many web pages no XML is really required (though I = believe any text, beyond a sentence, or label, should be properly marked-= up for typographical use at least =96 that does not need a full XML docum= ent however) Cleaning-up XML as a format may seem a modest enough objective, but separ= ating data from process is an important thing, data permanency may not be= important to 9/10ths of the web, but it is damn important for preserving= literature in digital form =96 processing instructions of any kind corru= pt this potential.=20 Clean REBOL XML may be an approach that may meet with some niche interest= , but I think the implications are greater than that. Plus with dialecting being such a strong part of REBOL, integrating minim= al structural markup is not such a big issue (it does not corrupt more e= fficient scripting methods in normal REBOL). Just some thoughts sorry for the long post. Greg Schofield Perth Australia --- Message Received --- From: Carlos Lorenz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 10:12:44 -0300 Subject: [REBOL] Re: XML comments >> implications for R3 For me, the bad side is when people see xml as something else than a > "format", a way to interchange. unfortunately, xml has become a golden= > hammer. its an end-all buzz word for many of those un-skilled and > non-programmer managers, who buy stuff from clueless salesmen who know > only > that they have to push this "thing" their boss tells them to. I agree with you. XML is in most CV/Resumes I have seen lately. It=B4s qu= ite a *MUST*. And sadly there is a lot of people that also consider it as a programming language :( --=20 Carlos Lorenz www.revistaeletronica.com.br Unidade Lorenz Ltda (11) 4034 1971 --=20 To unsubscribe from the list, just send an email to=20 lists at rebol.com with unsubscribe as the subject. -- To unsubscribe from the list, just send an email to lists at rebol.com with unsubscribe as the subject.
