[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Should nXML be included

From: Lennart Borgman (gmail)
Subject: Re: Should nXML be included
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2007 14:57:06 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv: Gecko/20070326 Thunderbird/ Mnenhy/

Jason Rumney wrote:
Lennart Borgman (gmail) wrote:
nXml is very good and I hope it will be included in Emacs. However
there are reasons to break it up. I think the parsing code somehow
should be broken up so that it can work for cases where the buffer is
divided into multiple major modes.

I think what you really mean is that you want to use nxml-mode to edit
non-xml files. Is that right? The problem I see with this is that the
power of nxml-mode compared to psgml and sgml modes is that it deals
with strict xml, and deals with it well. As soon as you start ripping
out features to support non-XML documents, you're back to a general SGML
mode and the compromises that brings.

Yes, you are right, I want to edit non-xml files.

But I think the power of nxml-mode can still be used. The parser provides to things: Validation and completion.

Validation of course loose most of its meanings, but not all. Completion can still be used. In fact that is what I do in nXhtml with nxhtml-mode + mumamo-mode. To be able to make it more cleanly than currently the parser must be broken out.

If you really want to create PHP in an XML file, you need to use CDATA
blocks to tell the XML parser to ignore the invalid tags in that block.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]