Dmitrij D. Czarkoff wrote:
> Eckehard Berns said:
> > You only write a parser once. But you write some magnitude more markup
> > that is going to be parsed by it. So optimizing the markup specification
> > for authoring has a better net gain than to optimize the protocol just to
> > get away with a simpler parser.
>
> Actually, if parser behavior is simple and easily predictable, the task
> of writing markup is easier. When I write correct HTML, I still have to
> open browser to see how it renders, because I have no way to predict the
> actual result (apart from my experience with different generally
> unexpected results that serve me the basis for educated guess).
Fair point. For me HTML usually renders as I expected. But that's
because I do this for over a decade, I guess. If it doesn't it usually
is because of a misunderstanding in semantics (e.g. the broken
block-model in IE until 7) and using XML wouldn't change that.
> This alone is sufficient for me to be all for simplistic strict parser
> with zero fault tollerance.
I think it comes down to what is actually easier for the person writing
the markup. For me it's HTML for others it might be XML. Hadn't thought
of that.
--
Eckehard Berns
Received on Fri Feb 21 2014 - 15:35:40 CET