On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 00:33 +0200, Thien-Thi Nguyen wrote: > () Richard Stallman <r...@gnu.org> > () Mon, 13 Aug 2012 16:51:20 -0400 > > Perhaps people resist XML, no matter its viability, because it is ugly. > > Karl's talking about using it as an output format, not to write by hand. > > Yes, i understand. Anyway, one program(mer)'s output is another's > input. I use the word "ugly" also from the pov of a programmer who > enjoys, but dislikes being limited to, list and string processing. > Perhaps better would have been "impoverished". > > It would be cool if Texinfo were able to produce SXML, a format > directly translatable to/from XML, directly. > > Since we like Lisp, SXML might be better than XML. Is there a free > converter between XML and SXML? I would guess there is. > > There are several. Guile can do it directly (by loading some modules). > Emacs does something similar (building an internal tree) that is not too > far from "proper SXML".
Besides, our new project GNU XmlAT aims to handle XML properly. And one of its function is the conversion between the popular format(xml/json/ymal...), SXML will be the mediator of these formats, or be the final output format. Since XmlAT is written with GNU Guile, it has the power to handle SXML in nature. But it's development depends on GNU Guile, since there're something modules need to be fixed/enhanced. So it'll be long term. Anyway, for a baby project which has been created just for 3 months, there's lot of work to do. But it'll be an good alternative someday you may choose. Regards. -- GNU Powered it GPL Protected it GOD Blessed it HFG - NalaGinrut
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
