Re: Scripting in Gnome

[jamie <jamiemcc blueyonder co uk>]

On Tue, 2004-02-03 at 17:14, Danilo Segan wrote:

> > XML as opposed to what? A propriety text format? An EBNF grammar format?
> 
> I suppose you're going to come up with XML scheme (or DTD) that will
> be as proprietary as any other ASCII-based format with proper
> documentation.
> 

XML is designed to be human readable and so it should in theory be
easier for someone to alter or create the xml files than it would a
propriety format. 

> > XML is useful , not just because its in fashion but also because there
> > are a lot of tools for working with xml documents. Im writing it in
> > Python and it has extensive support for XML, so why not use its xml
> > facilities especially as it will help speed up development?
> 
> Those are the advantages of storing data in a file using XML syntax,
> but my understanding is that storing instructions (what a definition
> of a language basically is) is not very well suited for it.

I dont believe its any worse than any other format. As I have said XML
has its advantages.
> 
> Your insisting on using XML seems a bit unconvincing -- storing data
> is here the least of all problems I would say, and you've got so much
> more problems to resolve before you come to that.  If it's easier for
> you to prototype with XML as opposed to something else, that's not
> something to be brought up as a point for or against your idea.

It was not meant to be a point in favour of my idea - just a simple
feature of it. Do you have a better format in mind?

> 
> So, my humble request would be to drop that XML propaganda, and keep
> on thinking of "interoperation" and "shared interfaces" (sounds a lot
> like simplified CORBA, which is probably welcome at any time, so
> I don't consider your ideas bad or not worth it).

IDL is not exactly human readable (compared to XML) in my opinion. I
dont want to create a script engine which requires users to know Corba
IDL in order to amend or create a new language. Most people are familiar
with XML - i can see no case for using anything else at the moment.

> 
> You may also stick with some keywords such as "simple language
> definition" or "straightforward interfacing", but XML is really not
> very relevant here.  And you keep coming up with the XML as the main
> thing, which it clearly isn't.

XML is just a feature nothing more - I apologise if im over-emphasising
it

> 
> I believe this is the point Maciej was trying to make here, but I
> don't represent him in court, so he may curse at me if I'm wrong.



> 
> Cheers,
> Danilo