In trying to diagnose the recent issue with the sxml parsing libraries, I was super-confused by your package’s use of the term ‘xexp’ to mean… well, something very much like sxml. Given the name, I assumed it would instead be something very much like x-expressions.
I’ve just taken a quick look at Oleg’s sxml specification, and I find, to my mild disappointment, that it’s extremely well-written and precise, and I now understand why you’d be reluctant to describe your format as being sxml. It’s pretty darn close to SXML/1NF, though. It’s just those darn entities that are going to be problematic. Anyhow, in my opinion, naming your function html->sxml rather than “html->xexp” would reduce confusion; the documentation is already quite clear about the minor differences between SXML/xexp and SXML. Just my two cents, I suppose. John -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Racket Developers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/racket-dev/B5F16CD0-75EA-42A4-9FE0-3A4A3EC6A111%40brinckerhoff.org. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
