On Sab, 4 de Diciembre de 2004, 10:22, Daniel Fagerstrom dijo:<snip/>
I never used Dreamwaver (not sure if this is a shame to me). What I use is jEdit - http://www.jedit.org/ . It is only a 2.5MB java installer + some cool plugins. If what we need is a syntax checker + highlighting for JTXG, we can write it for jEdit:
http://www.jedit.org/42docs/api/org/gjt/sp/jedit/syntax/package-summary.html
Its not about syntax checking its about WYSIWYG for the HTML, read Stefano's and Niclas' answers.
It is easier that refactor a language just to fit in a tool. BTW, I never heard about a similar case before. ;-)
And if one put the directives in attributes instead of elements with special namespaces that works much better. The attribute based languages might be less verbose and easier to read also.
Why? To me this a matter of taste.
If taste not is important for you, it shouldn't matter ;)
I think, as I hinted about in my RT about Attribute Driven Templates, that we basically can allow both attribute driven and tag driven templates from the same implementation.
If people blame us because they can use #{$...} or ${...} I don't know what to expect by adding new istructions syntax. The result seems to be: "more troubles than help."
So we could resue the JXTG tags as attribute directives and avoid the need for maintaining double implementations.
See the last comment. While I understand a potentiall "gain" from the developers POV. I see a nightmare for users. ;-)
As said above, read Stefano's and Niclas mails for motivation and explanation about why it would be very usefull for some users.
/Daniel
