On 3/22/2010 22:44, Petr Rockai wrote:
[email protected] (Trent W. Buck) writes:
Max Battcher<[email protected]> writes:
[...] Of course, RFC822 is full of loopholes and surprisingly hard to
parse in reality [...] I think I have a reasonable suggestion that is
easier to parse than RFC822, but carries a similar effect: YAML
formatted darcs comments.
Can you support this claim?
I agree with Trent in disagreeing. RFC822 is infinitely nicer for human
readers than YAML, JSON and all the other postmodern plain-text-come-xml
formats. This also means that it is the most backwards-compatible option
we have, by the virtue of rendering nicely even if it is not rendered at
all (i.e. displayed verbatim).
Ignoring the %YAML directive, and intentionally avoiding YAML tags, I
think that a YAML mapping (key-value document) in the default "flowed"
format looks exactly like RFC822. YAML provides more explicit data
typing, and more explicit character escaping than RFC822. YAML
ultimately is an attempt to make a useful data model like JSON look a
lot more like RFC822, and I'm sure it takes plenty of learned knowledge
from RFC822's experience...
Certainly all of this is subject, but I've actually done some work
directly in writing YAML, precisely because I think it "renders nicely"
when "not rendered at all".
--
--Max Battcher--
http://worldmaker.net
_______________________________________________
darcs-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
