I'll vote for traditional XML too. Web development is not only programmers business.The overburdened syntax is a weak point of many Haskell libraries. Remember pig operator <^(++)^> from http://contemplatecode.blogspot.ru/2013/07/haskell-weekly-news-issue-273.html :))
Regards, Sergey 2015-06-17 20:59 GMT+03:00 Adam Chlipala <[email protected]>: > On 06/17/2015 01:37 PM, Gabriel Riba wrote: >> >> I have worked out the feasibility of Haskell's Hamlet style xml. >> >> [...] >> >> Are you interested? > > > Thanks for looking into this! > > I can imagine that some (current or potential) Ur/Web users would appreciate > this feature. At the same time, since XML syntax is already very widely > known among programmers, there is adoption value in retaining it. > > So, I'm interested in opinions from folks on this mailing list, about > whether Gabriel's patch might be appropriate to accept into the main Ur/Web > tree. > > (I think my personal preference would be to stick to the traditional XML > syntax. I'm warying of including alternative syntaxes, and the classic > syntax seems important for accessibility to newcomers.) > > > _______________________________________________ > Ur mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.impredicative.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ur _______________________________________________ Ur mailing list [email protected] http://www.impredicative.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ur
