[E-Lang] Draft Kernel-E DTD & Sketch of translation to debuggable Java

[Mark S. Miller]

At 03:31 PM 9/27/00 , Dan Bornstein wrote:
>      <vector>
>        <el><int>1</int></el>
>        <el><string>foo</string></el>
>      </vector>

vs

>     <object>
>       <class><backref>1</backref></class>
>       <iv><int>0</int></iv>
>       <iv><int>2</int></iv>
>       <iv>
>         <array>
>           <class><backref>2</backref></class>
>           <el>
>             <object>
>               <class><backref>3</backref></class>
>               <int>1</int>
>             </object>
>           </el>
>           <el>
>             <string>bar</string>
>           </el>
>         </array>
>       </iv>
>     </object>
...
>In terms of making your JOSS/XML use something more symbolic instead of
><backref>, you'd be moving away from the claim that the XML form is a
>transparent translation of JOSS. And, if you're willing to go for that, I'd
>say, just go the rest of the way and do something in XML that doesn't
>necessarily look *anything* like the underlying JOSS but *does* have a
>straightforward translation back and forth.

I find this example convincing.  Back to the drawing board.  Thanks, you've 
saved me from going down a rathole.


Everyone, I'll be traveling and mostly inaccessible till Thursday Oct 5, but 
will try to check email occasionally.  Thanks for a good discussion.  With 
the discovery of Minimal-XML, this whole direction looks vastly more 
reasonable.


         Cheers,
         --MarkM