Tatu Saloranta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > --- Kendall Shaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Jirka Kosek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > ... >> > I don't see in what aspect is this syntax better >> then XML. Anyway in RNC >> > you can already write this as: >> >> It would be compact as much as the relax ng compact >> syntax is compact >> compared to the XML form. > > You might want to check out JSON. It has bit more > compact yet very simple textual notation, and has > basic typing you need for expressing structs (string, > int, boolean, lists, maps). There are couple of > packages for exposing JSON via xml interfaces, too, if > there's need for tool interoperability. > Just an idea,
Thanks, that's interesting, and I may even want to use it. I wonder how many people will like JSON and still argue that Lisp is too hard to read because of all the parenthesis. But, I am still wondering if anyone has separated out the exact same encoding that is used for transforming RNC into RNG, without occurance operators etc., for use as a compact syntax for XML in general, most likely where the XML is almost entirely markup. Kendall
