On Dec 17, 1:51 am, Hampton <[email protected]> wrote: > I haven't had time to read all of this. But, see... starting off with the > "Content is king" > bit is a nearly opposite philosophy to Haml. Haml is that structure and > markup are > king. The content is just filler. > > Haml is about semantics when building web applications. Content is usually > dynamic and is only important in how clearly its specified. >
Yep, I got the same feedback from a couple of folks on this thread, so I decided to put the structural stuff first, more in line with Haml. > However, I am always interested in people coming up with new languages! > > I might not want to use them, but I love the creativity. > Thanks! By the way I renamed the project to shpaml, and you can try it here: http://shpaml.webfactional.com/try_it Shpaml is not an exact clone of Haml, but it borrows lots of ideas, of course. I have only just started on Haml-like div sugar, so only simple examples will work there, but the overall indentation scheme is in place. There is no syntax required for tags at the block level. You do need special syntax for tags like br, hr, etc. (either "> br" or "<br />" works). There is no special syntax required for content unless you have a line with "|" or ">" in it, in which case you prefix the line with "| ". -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Haml" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/haml?hl=en.
