Sean Conner <s...@conman.org> writes:
> It was thus said that the Great Daniel Pittman once stated:
>> "Tony Gies" <tony.g...@gmail.com> writes:
>> > On 9/27/07, Daniel Pittman <dan...@rimspace.net> wrote:
>> >> ...you were going so well and then, suddenly...
>> >
>> > I think one of us is missing something here, because you appear
>> > actually to be agreeing with me completely?
>>
>> One of us must be. Perhaps it was my sarcasm, perhaps I completely
>> misunderstood your point. To help clear this up:
>>
>> There is no difference in the information conveyed using a child tag or
>> an attribute of a tag.
>>
>> The only difference between the two, in SGML, is that attributes have
>> less rules applied. They can, and often are, more informal.
>>
>> Their existing is a mistake. Their use is typically[1] a sign that the
>> developer of the ML failed to understand the essential sameness of the
>> two expressions /or/ decided that they wanted the lazy path.
>
> So, you're saying you would rather have:
>
> <p><a>I grew up reading Uncle Scrooge<href>2005/01/21.1</href></a>,
I am saying that there is no significant difference between the level of
information that (or the other format with the extra text tag) and the
form that uses attributes.
I am also saying that the attributes have more relaxed rules applied
than the tags, something that is essentially a mistake in my opinion,
because it creates a "get out of design free" card.
Finally, of note: we were talking about the abomination of XML that was
designed by taking SGML, pulling anything designed to make it human or
author friendly out, then claiming that this was all done for the best
because we can much better afford to spend human brain "cycles" than a
few CPU cycles dealing with the added complexity.
Daniel
Why, yes, XML is a complete waste of effort that has added zero value on
top of the traditional SGML.
--
X Windows is the Iran-Contra of graphical user interfaces: a tragedy of
political compromises, entangled alliances, marketing hype, and just plain
greed. X Windows is to memory as Ronald Reagan was to money.
-- The Unix Haters Handbook
