Re: parsing non-XML to DOM -- "XML without all the angle brackets"

"Karl M. Syring" <syring@email.com>
11 Mar 2002 02:10:23 -0500

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
parsing non-XML to DOM -- "XML without all the angle brackets" robert_dodier@yahoo.com (2002-03-09)
Re: parsing non-XML to DOM -- "XML without all the angle brackets" syring@email.com (Karl M. Syring) (2002-03-11)
Re: parsing non-XML to DOM -- "XML without all the angle brackets" joachim_d@gmx.de (Joachim Durchholz) (2002-03-11)
| List of all articles for this month |
From: "Karl M. Syring" <syring@email.com>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 11 Mar 2002 02:10:23 -0500
Organization: Compilers Central
References: 02-03-012
Keywords: translator
Posted-Date: 11 Mar 2002 02:10:23 EST

"Robert Dodier" <robert_dodier@yahoo.com> schrieb
> I have an idea that goes like this. XML has lots of advantages,
> but human comprehensibility isn't one of them. It seems to me
> that XML would be a lot more comprehensible if we just drop
> the angle brackets and redundant stuff -- to have
>
> toptag nextlevel { stillmore bottom1 "hello" yetagain "world" }
>
> as opposed to
>
> <toptag><nextlevel><stillmore><bottom1>hello</bottom1>
> <yetagain>world</yetagain></stillmore></nextlevel></toptag>
>
> I would like to still use a DTD to state the grammar, and I'd
> like to parse stuff into a DOM -- that's handy for programs
> to work with, so let's keep it.
<snip>


I think, your idea has already been taken. There is
SXML translates XML to Scheme and back
(http://okmij.org/ftp/Scheme/SXML.html)
HaXml translates XML to Haskell and back
(http://www.cs.york.ac.uk/fp/HaXml/)
The drawback is obviously that you may have to learn new programming
languages.


Karl M. Syring

Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.