From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,80b3e504140e89fd
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-07-03 07:10:41 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!eusc.inter.net!cs.tu-berlin.de!uni-duisburg.de!not-for-mail
From: Georg Bauhaus <sb463ba@l1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Config_Files proposal {long}
Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2002 14:10:38 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: GMUGHDU
Message-ID: <afv0ku$h8k$1@a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de>
References: <uwuswy0qr.fsf@gsfc.nasa.gov> <afk460$9f5$1@geraldo.cc.utexas.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: l1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de
X-Trace: a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de 1025705438 17684 134.91.4.34 (3 Jul 2002
 14:10:38 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@news.uni-duisburg.de
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2002 14:10:38 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: tin/1.5.8-20010221 ("Blue Water") (UNIX) (HP-UX/B.11.00
 (9000/800))
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:26843
Date: 2002-07-03T14:10:38+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Bobby D. Bryant <bdbryant@mail.utexas.edu> wrote:
[Scheme vs XML]
: 
: The latter is, IMO, *much* easier to read and comprehend.  It's
: also about (guessingly) 40% smaller. ...
:  the
: lean syntax can be very important in config files because it
: promotes readability -- partly through reduced clutter, and partly
: because there will be fewer times when non-semantic line wraps are
: required.

All this is usually addressed in good DTD design (and you will
be pleased to hear, if you haven't yet, that the ISO standard
accompanying SGML, DSSSL, is actually describing a specialised
Scheme).

It is a sad mistake that people don't see tags as carrying essential
meaning (like your identifiers in function name position do),
and not syntax clutter.
Tags and Attributes as important means of adding explicit additional
infomration about the structure of the document, mutual relations,
data types, restrictions, constraints....

As long as we will see uninformed non-sensical abuse like I have
to from time to time:

<ingredient>
<number>1</number><colon/>
 <type>flour<variant>wheat</variant></type>
 <amount>125<unit>g</unit></amount>
</ingredient>

there will be a lot to criticize about the "features" of XML.
It could be written, not loosing anything:

<ingredient amount="125" unit="g">
 <flour type="wheat"/>
</ingredient>

Moreover, something makes me start thinking there is a general dislike
for anything but parentheses in some parts of the Ada community :->
Anything but dots and parens and semicola is called clutter?

: The only disadvantage I can think of is that the lack of labeled
: end markers makes it hard to see where very long lists end.

Add to this the varying skill of customers at using Lisp-syntax aware
editors...

:  cosmetic
: comment, thus:
: ...
:   (Floats
:      (F1 1.2)
:      (F2 2.3)
:      (F3 4.2)
:      (F4 1.9)
:       ...
:      (F468 7.2)
:      (Comment: End of "Floats" section.)
:   )

Are these cosmetic comments easily checked to belong to where
they should belong? Same for ()?


Really, these SGML/XML guys have spent more than 30 years on how to
add marking syntax to data carrying document text--I think
they have done something that should at least be considered a
valuable source of information. At least in this corner of config
file discussions. Of course you can't compute with XML like you
can with Scheme.

If you look closely, you will note that, to Lisp programmers,
there is a familiar nesting in SGML/XML :-)

<Floats desc="whatever these numbers mean...">
 <F id="north" v="1.2"/>
 <F id="west"  v="2.3"/>
 <F id="south" v="4.2"/>
 <F id="east"  v="1.9"/>
 <!-- ... -->
</Float>


-- Georg