On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 16:33, Colin Paul Adams
<colin(_at_)colina(_dot_)demon(_dot_)co(_dot_)uk> wrote:
But I don't agree that it is a good idea. What should the type look
like? Certainly not the W3C DOM.
DOM was yet another inbaked API, nothing more. No, XML as native to
languages should, IMHO, look like XML, where <result> =
<value>{$variable}</value> + <value>{$other}</value> ; becomes ;
<result> <value>...</value> <value>...</value> </result>
or ;
result = <some.xml /> ;
<root version="1.0"> += result ;
<root version="1.3" /> ;
Is ;
<root version="1.3">
<some.xml />
</root>
I'm sure if a bunch of people think about this for a little while we
could come up with something that's pretty cool, and urge languages to
adopt it. I personally would like to see more XPath and XSLT goodness
in it, perhaps even with template definitions. As if. :(
Alex
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Project Wrangler, SOA, Information Alchemist, UX, RESTafarian, Topic Maps
------------------------------------------ http://shelter.nu/blog/ --------
--~------------------------------------------------------------------
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
To unsubscribe, go to: http://lists.mulberrytech.com/xsl-list/
or e-mail: <mailto:xsl-list-unsubscribe(_at_)lists(_dot_)mulberrytech(_dot_)com>
--~--