Re: [9fans] vga hell

[dvd@davidashen.net]

>>>/lib/vgadb converted to xml via perl, say
>
> it would need to be a perl implementation of xslt to meet w3c stundards (a `stundard'
> is a self-declared standard that makes you feel stunned esp. if it hits you), but i digress:


1. There is a perl implementation of XSLT.
2. Where did you met word 'standard' in connection with w3c?
3. What's wrong with XSLT?

>
> i think it's wrong to include lisp in that `hellish' set, with vga, perl and xml,
> at least in the sense of the underlying lisp `core'.
> i admit the Common Lisp book has the disadvantage that at 50 pounds the price is also the weight,

Why have you chosen Common Lisp to compare? Common Lisp is not the most
common lisp in the world. And there are small and compact lisps, too.

> but that's the usual standards hell, not restricted to lisp.  if the spiders had used s-expressions
> for structured data, and lisp for portable transformation, any resulting
> standards mess might have been easier to circumnavigate, or perhaps avoid.

lisp *was* used for processing of structural data on the web. The name is DSSSL.
Then it has turned out that the tree paradigm of XML is more convenient than
the traditional list processing paradigm of the many lisps. Hence XSLT, by the
way.

> w3c also wouldn't have ended up in an xml-binary tangle (because there's a standard transport
> encoding for s-expressions that encompasses binary as ... binary; such magic!)

Many projects become cluttered after twelve years of development. Others just
become abandoned. It is very difficult to remain both compact and popular
for such a long time; do you know any examples?

David