[Openmcl-devel] ccl manual (was Re: trace on recursive functions)
ron at flownet.com
Tue Dec 15 18:41:37 UTC 2009
On Dec 15, 2009, at 9:33 AM, Waldek Hebisch wrote:
> Ron Garret wrote:
>> I am certainly no fan of reinventing the wheel for the sake of reinventing the wheel. But markup is a special case, for two reasons. First, SGML/XML/HTML *are* S-expressions, only with a more cumbersome syntax. There is a formal equivalence between:
>> (foo ...)
>> So it's trivial to go back and forth between the two.
>> But there is one thing that everyone here should be able to agree on and that is that S-expressions are cool. That, plus the fact that there is a good impedance match here, to me means that this is as good a problem as any to collectively tackle. If not this, then what?
> I think you forget basic fact: XML is ugly _bacause_ it was designed
> to be a markup language.
No. XML is ugly because it is badly designed. There is nothing in the fundamental physics of markup that requires ugliness. There are existence proofs that non-ugly markup languages are not only possible, but not all that hard to design and implement. Markdown is the poster child. Even Common Lisp itself can be considered a (very narrowly focused) markup language by virtue of having docstrings as part of its syntax. Common Lisp is not particularly good or capable as a markup language, which is why no one is suggesting using it for the application at hand. But it is another data point to prove that XML is not the be-all and end-all of markup.
More information about the Openmcl-devel