SGML/XML is very much like lisp which typically uses hyphens in identifiers.
I agree that underscores are hard to see also. But, this is all trivial of course. IJustFindItAnnoyingToReadTextWithoutSpaces. On Thu, 2008-01-03 at 14:08 -0500, Mitch Amiano wrote: > I'm not making excuses or even a rationale, simply trying to provide a > suggestion as to why so many people use camelCase even when it isn't > required. > > Underscore is certainly an acceptable character for identifiers in DTDs, > RelaxNG, and many programming languages. However, the original poster > didn't ask about using an underscore. > > The inclusion of the "-" and "." as identifier characters in SGML/XML > was a somewhat unconventional practice, when considered in the domain of > computer languages. When reading works from before XML, such as > Goldfarb's annotated SGML reference, one gets the sense that avoiding > too close an association between SGML identifiers and programming > language identifiers was deliberate. > > Colin Paul Adams wrote: > > > > >>>>> "Mitch" == Mitch Amiano <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > <mailto:mamiano%40nc.rr.com>> writes: > > > > Mitch> No doubt it is that so many people use that convention in > > Mitch> programming too. But consider that in many programming > > Mitch> languages, zero-or-more would not be an identifier but an > > Mitch> expression zero(minus)or(minus)more. So camel case allows > > Mitch> you to think of the element and attribute labels as > > Mitch> identifiers, without any other mapping. > > > > That's a very poor excuse, since you can use zero_or_more, which is > > even closer to natural english syntax than zero-or-more (in as much as > > _ resembles as space more). > > -- > > Colin Adams > > Preston Lancashire > > > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > >
