2013/10/24 Bobby Powers :
> I think Russ Cox said it very well[1]:
>
> Mapping between XML elements and data structures is inherently flawed:
> an XML element is an order-dependent collection of anonymous values,
> while a data structure is an order-independent collection of named
> values. See [.
2013/10/24, Alexander S. :
> Personally, I'm okay with XML, and feel like Archangel Uriel, may he
> rest in peace, was slightly exaggerating. XSLT may be horrid, though,
> and XML is maybe *too* verbose, but the idea of having a structure as
> a building block is totally okay with me. There is expa
2013/10/24 Charlie Kester :
> So don't use it as a markup language.
>
> As far as I know, it was never claimed to be fit for that purpose.
Um.
2013/10/23 Mihail Zenkov :
> It not mention good xml alternative: TOML
> https://github.com/mojombo/toml
1) TOML is basically .ini on steroids,
2) XML is
2013/10/24 Samuel Holland :
> [body]
> content="%ol%%p%"
> [ol]
> style="list-style-type: decimal"
> content="%li.1%%li.2%%li.3"
> [li]
> style="display: list-item"
> content1="Lack of proper hierarchy, for one;"
> content2="Lack of proper heterogeneous containers, for two;"
> content3="%b%:\nlack
Chris Down wrote:
>On 2013-10-24 01:04, Samuel Holland wrote:
>> [body]
>> content="%ol%%p%"
>> [ol]
>> style="list-style-type: decimal"
>> content="%li.1%%li.2%%li.3"
>> [li]
>> style="display: list-item"
>> content1="Lack of proper hierarchy, for one;"
>> content2="Lack of proper heterogeneous c
On 2013-10-24 14:43, Chris Down wrote:
> On 2013-10-24 01:04, Samuel Holland wrote:
> > [body]
> > content="%ol%%p%"
> > [ol]
> > style="list-style-type: decimal"
> > content="%li.1%%li.2%%li.3"
> > [li]
> > style="display: list-item"
> > content1="Lack of proper hierarchy, for one;"
> > content2="
On 2013-10-24 01:04, Samuel Holland wrote:
> [body]
> content="%ol%%p%"
> [ol]
> style="list-style-type: decimal"
> content="%li.1%%li.2%%li.3"
> [li]
> style="display: list-item"
> content1="Lack of proper hierarchy, for one;"
> content2="Lack of proper heterogeneous containers, for two;"
> conten
"Alexander S." wrote:
> 2013/10/24 Mihail Zenkov :
> > 2013/10/23, Alexander S. :
> >>> I'm confused as to what is wrong with the .ini style configurations.
> >>> They're not just used in Windows, they're used in many other places that
> >>> require simple, easy to use configurations. Python uses
2013/10/23, Alexander S. :
So what problem do you have with a .ini file?
>>> They are okay for simple config files. They are the opposite of okay
>>> for a markup language.
>>
>> Why?
>
> Lack of proper hierarchy, for one;
> Lack of proper heterogenous containers, for two;
> The most import
On Wed 23 Oct 2013 at 16:44:34 PDT Alexander S. wrote:
2013/10/24 Mihail Zenkov :
2013/10/23, Alexander S. :
I'm confused as to what is wrong with the .ini style configurations.
They're not just used in Windows, they're used in many other places that
require simple, easy to use configurations.
2013/10/24 Mihail Zenkov :
> 2013/10/23, Alexander S. :
>>> I'm confused as to what is wrong with the .ini style configurations.
>>> They're not just used in Windows, they're used in many other places that
>>> require simple, easy to use configurations. Python uses it, there are C
>>> api's for it,
2013/10/23, Alexander S. :
>> I'm confused as to what is wrong with the .ini style configurations.
>> They're not just used in Windows, they're used in many other places that
>> require simple, easy to use configurations. Python uses it, there are C
>> api's for it, etc.
>>
>> So what problem do yo
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 02:20:29AM +0400, Alexander S. wrote:
> 2013/10/24 William Giokas <1007...@gmail.com>:
> > On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 10:35:03PM +, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> >> Mihail Zenkov dixit:
> >>
> >> >It not mention good xml alternative: TOML
> >>
> >> Thank gods the time of Windows
2013/10/24 William Giokas <1007...@gmail.com>:
> On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 10:35:03PM +, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
>> Mihail Zenkov dixit:
>>
>> >It not mention good xml alternative: TOML
>>
>> Thank gods the time of Windows 3.x *.ini files is long gone.
>
> I'm confused as to what is wrong with the
you guy bore me
On 10/23/13, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> hiro dixit:
>
>>the format of ini files are a problem for you??
>
> Multiple question marks, he said, are a sure sign of a diseased mind.
> (Or something like that. It’s been some time since I last read him.)
>
>>On 10/23/13, Thorsten Glaser
On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 10:35:03PM +, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> Mihail Zenkov dixit:
>
> >It not mention good xml alternative: TOML
>
> Thank gods the time of Windows 3.x *.ini files is long gone.
I'm confused as to what is wrong with the .ini style configurations.
They're not just used in Wi
koneu dixit:
>Oh please tell me a good alternative free and reliable mail service.
sendmail? postfix? There’s a lot of stuff around, and you can
just run them for free on your own server. Easy to set up, too.
(This is really stupid. Besides, you could just search around
for unix shell accounts o
Thorsten Glaser wrote:
>But what do I expect from a Googlemail user?
Oh please tell me a good alternative free and reliable mail service.
I hate Google. But all the others append ads.
OT:
XML is like cancer.
It is disgusting to work with and disgusting to look at.
And you really wanna get rid of
hiro dixit:
>the format of ini files are a problem for you??
Multiple question marks, he said, are a sure sign of a diseased mind.
(Or something like that. It’s been some time since I last read him.)
>On 10/23/13, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
Oh great, TOFU! Please read and honour
http://www.afaik.d
the format of ini files are a problem for you??
On 10/23/13, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> Mihail Zenkov dixit:
>
>>It not mention good xml alternative: TOML
>
> Thank gods the time of Windows 3.x *.ini files is long gone.
>
> bye,
> //mirabilos
> --
> Beware of ritual lest you forget the meaning beh
Mihail Zenkov dixit:
>It not mention good xml alternative: TOML
Thank gods the time of Windows 3.x *.ini files is long gone.
bye,
//mirabilos
--
Beware of ritual lest you forget the meaning behind it.
yeah but it means if you really care about something, don't
ritualise it, or you will lo
2013/10/23 Mihail Zenkov :
> 2013/10/21, hiro <23h...@gmail.com>:
>> It seems like some subscribers haven't read the bible of suckless yet.
>> http://harmful.cat-v.org/software/
>> and
>> http://harmful.cat-v.org/software/xml/
>
> It not mention good xml alternative: TOML
> https://github.com/mojom
2013/10/21, hiro <23h...@gmail.com>:
> It seems like some subscribers haven't read the bible of suckless yet.
> http://harmful.cat-v.org/software/
> and
> http://harmful.cat-v.org/software/xml/
It not mention good xml alternative: TOML
https://github.com/mojombo/toml
It seems like some subscribers haven't read the bible of suckless yet.
http://harmful.cat-v.org/software/
and
http://harmful.cat-v.org/software/xml/
On 10/20/13, Szymon Olewniczak wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 20, 2013 at 01:02:34AM +0200, Dmitrij D. Czarkoff wrote:
>> Evan Buswell said:
>> > But OTOH, I
Szymon Olewniczak said:
> I'm serching for something similar as dwm in the web services world.
The thing you were talking about initially - if I got you right - is
another CMS engine. You may look at werc for a good implementation of
this idea.
If you want something more lightweight, you may hav
On Sun, Oct 20, 2013 at 01:02:34AM +0200, Dmitrij D. Czarkoff wrote:
> Evan Buswell said:
> > But OTOH, I do like the idea of separating the translation-to-html bit
> > from the generate-sensible-output bit. XSLT may have done this poorly,
> > but it's on the right track (and what else works better
Evan Buswell dixit:
>like you're gonna put UTF-8 parsing into cat.
cat is just a sendfile, it’s not doing anything with the content.
On the other hand, for a data exchange format, some measure of
data types is a commodity. JSON is not binary-safe, true, but the
Unix/Plan 9 way doesn’t need it to
Evan Buswell said:
> I'm really not saying something very profound here, so I'm a bit
> confused by the sarcastic response. For certain things it's pointless
> and inefficient to parse something and then deparse it later. It's not
> like you're gonna put UTF-8 parsing into cat.
This brings you int
I'm really not saying something very profound here, so I'm a bit
confused by the sarcastic response. For certain things it's pointless
and inefficient to parse something and then deparse it later. It's not
like you're gonna put UTF-8 parsing into cat.
On Sat, Oct 19, 2013 at 4:33 PM, Dmitrij D. Cz
Evan Buswell said:
> I can care that this is UTF-8 when I need to, and not care otherwise.
I would love to see the code that detects whether you care or not.
--
Dmitrij D. Czarkoff
It's still UTF-8 in practice. It's just IMO not the job of parsers of
this sort to start enforcing or translating the character set of
strings. All the parser has to look for is \" " and \\. I can care
that this is UTF-8 when I need to, and not care otherwise. I didn't
start replacing commas with n
Evan Buswell said:
> But OTOH, I do like the idea of separating the translation-to-html bit
> from the generate-sensible-output bit. XSLT may have done this poorly,
> but it's on the right track (and what else works better for this, Awk?
> Perl? m4?). I mean, I take the point that we can't really m
Evan Buswell dixit:
>playing with that adds symbolic references and uses binary instead of
>utf-8 strings); RST is better for structured text---though I'm not
Oh yeah, let’s all do binary now instead of passing around plaintext!
Wait. No!
Pointing out Unix/Plan 9 way works just fine,
//mirabilo
I loathe XML, but I think the OPs bigger point was: hey look, here is
a way that we can try and create a space between the suck of the web
and our code. So we support browsers through XSLT, and do something
slightly more sane with XML. I think that's a pretty valid suggestion.
IMO, this doesn't go
Szymon Olewniczak said:
>> s/HTML/XML+XSLT/g is quite a revolution.
> But it's something whitch I can use in my application straight away
> without forcing user to change their web browsers.
You aren't really about replacing HTML with XML+XSLT; you are about
*generating* HTML with XML+XSLT, are y
Alexander S. said:
>> SVG and MathML are probably the best arguments against XML ever. I am
>> yet to see two SVG libraries that would render sufficiently complex
>> spec-complient SVG equally. And I have no hope for seeing any
>> spec-complient SVG rendering library ever.
>
> I'd not agree that SV
HTML is there, other kinds of XML are avoidable. SVG is irrelevant,
cause nobody uses it.
Don't forget: you don't need to read XML specs to write working HTML.
On 10/19/13, Alexander S. wrote:
> 2013/10/18 Dmitrij D. Czarkoff :
>> Szymon Olewniczak said:
>>> Another advantage of XML is its adapta
2013/10/18 Dmitrij D. Czarkoff :
> Szymon Olewniczak said:
>> Another advantage of XML is its adaptation. We've already have MathML,
>> SVG and many many others[1] all build on top of XML.
>
> SVG and MathML are probably the best arguments against XML ever. I am yet to
> see two SVG libraries that
On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 3:09 PM, Szymon Olewniczak
wrote:
> I've started this topic becouse I'm woriking in a small family firm and
> we have decided that we need an new application to managing complaints,
> documentation, and several other things of our clients (I don't want to
> go into detail).
Szymon Olewniczak dixit:
>> s/HTML/XML+XSLT/g is quite a revolution.
>But it's something whitch I can use in my application straight away
>without forcing user to change their web browsers.
But XSLT is a joke. Have you *seen* the lengths people go through
to actually *do* anything in it?
It may
> On 18/10/2013, Szymon Olewniczak wrote:
> > I believe that we can make the web the better place without huge revolutino
>
> s/HTML/XML+XSLT/g is quite a revolution.
But it's something whitch I can use in my application straight away
without forcing user to change their web browsers.
> > (such
On 18/10/2013, Szymon Olewniczak wrote:
> I believe that we can make the web the better place without huge revolutino
s/HTML/XML+XSLT/g is quite a revolution.
> (such as changing HTTP to something else)
Which is this about, HTTP or HTML?
> Pages writen in XML has readable source
So have pages
On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 06:48:06PM +0200, Dmitrij D. Czarkoff wrote:
> Chris Down said:
> > On 2013-10-18 14:44, Szymon Olewniczak wrote:
> > > Pages writen in XML has readable source and data can be accessed much more
> > > easily.
> >
> > I don't even know what to say to this...
>
> Strictly sp
Greetings.
On Fri, 18 Oct 2013 19:17:55 +0200 Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> Chris Down dixit:
>
> >I don't even know what to say to this...
>
> Must be the full moon. First 20h “liking” kdbus, now this…
It shouldn’t be using »dbus« because dbus is this [0]. But yes, with the
local addresses all of
On Oct 18, 2013, at 4:00 PM, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> Must be the full moon. First 20h “liking” kdbus, now this…
Winter is coming.
Szymon Olewniczak said:
> Another advantage of XML is its adaptation. We've already have MathML,
> SVG and many many others[1] all build on top of XML.
SVG and MathML are probably the best arguments against XML ever. I am yet to
see two SVG libraries that would render sufficiently complex spec-com
Chris Down said:
> On 2013-10-18 14:44, Szymon Olewniczak wrote:
> > Pages writen in XML has readable source and data can be accessed much more
> > easily.
>
> I don't even know what to say to this...
Strictly speaking, I agree with OP on this: XML is much better then HTML
(actually fault-toleran
Chris Down dixit:
>I don't even know what to say to this...
Must be the full moon. First 20h “liking” kdbus, now this…
bye,
//mirabilos
--
This space for rent.
On 2013-10-18 14:44, Szymon Olewniczak wrote:
> Pages writen in XML has readable source and data can be accessed much more
> easily.
I don't even know what to say to this...
pgp_Gvokspkmt.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Szymon Olewniczak dixit:
>Pages writen in XML has readable source
No. Much like sendmail.cf, XML is a binary/object format
and ought to be treated as such.
bye,
//mirabilos
--
Sometimes they [people] care too much: pretty printers [and syntax highligh-
ting, d.A.] mechanically produce pretty ou
On Fri, 18 Oct 2013 14:44:55 +0200
Szymon Olewniczak wrote:
> At the and I want to ask you a question. What do you think would be
> the best solution for bulding websites which would look similar to
> this what we have now(gopher is great but ...) and would have easily
> accessible data for perso
Hi,
everyone knows that XML has its defects but considering some of our
discussions about suckless web ideas I think that XML + XSLT is quite a
good solution - much better than plain HTML. Pages writen in XML has
readable source and data can be accessed much more easily. In addition
using of XML c
52 matches
Mail list logo
