RE: [xml-dev] Suggestions for a slightly less verbose (and easier to author) XML

Exactly right.  The visual layout matters and indentation that does not
match structure causes confusion.  Tagged text is not bad for machine
processing (marginally bit slower than lisp-like syntax a would guess) but
terrible to look at.  The idea
of matching the opening and closing with a name has merrit because you can
visually match the open and close of a tag.  The problem is that the tagging
is so verbose the context is often lost as ones eye moves around the screen
-- you can't see the forest for the trees.

Indentation adds to human comprehension.  Syntactic decoration largely
decreases human comprehension.  

Future generations will thank us for adopting a standard interchange format
(XML) and curse us for its size and difficulty to read.  

Tagged text is great for machine-generated files which humans only have
occasional need to look at, which I guess is the use-case for XML. 




> -----Original Message-----
> From: Simon St.Laurent [mailto:]
> Sent: Monday, June 24, 2002 10:38 AM
> To: 
> Subject: Re: [xml-dev] Suggestions for a slightly less verbose (and
> easierto author) XML
 
> 
> Parsing theory and human capabilities aren't always a good 
> match.  There 
> are, of course, lots of tools that deal with simplifying 
> these problems...
> 
> Simon St.Laurent
> "Every day in every way I'm getting better and better." - Emile Coue
> 
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an
> initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>
> 
> The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>
>