>EXPERT HTML PROGRAMMER
4-ch.net/code
<?test ><!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd">
<html><?test ><!-- ?>
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<?test --><?test ?>
<head>
<?test >
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<!-- ?>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="application/xhtml+xml; charset=utf-8" />
<?test --> <?test ?>
<title>HTML or XML?</title>
</head>
<body>
<p>Is this file HTML or XML?</p>
<p>Why, it's <?test > HTML <!-- ?> XHTML <?test --> <?test ?> of course!</p>
</body>
</html>><!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN"
>"http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd">
who uses html 4 these days?
<!DOCTYPE html><html>...
>>5
That's XHTML 1.0.
Well, actually it's both.
That trick isn't possible with HTML5, because HTML5 isn't XML or SGML.
IMO, once they decided to ditch XML and SGML, they really should have gone with a more sensible style of markup... maybe something like RTF. But I guess there's some unwritten law that standards can't be sensible.
>>6
prefix hypertext markup with continue indications
(leltype！！！ phm)
(phm
(charset shift_jis)
(parse until (end)))
(title standards@4ch)
...
(fuck wakabamark)
>>7
It doesn't have to be strictly prefix though, so likely another name..
>>7,8
S-expressions are a thing, you guys.
>>10
I guess you don't write Lisp. Semantic formatting is the antithesis of brevity, expressiveness, and beauty of code. S-expressions, on the other hand, deliberately make syntax not matter at all, by virtue of there being practically none.
If you want a layout-looking markup language then use markdown or whatever other shit is currently popular.
>>11
Shitty, hard-to-read syntax is not the same thing as no syntax.
>>12
You clearly don't Lisp.
Come back when you've even tried to use it.
> This SRFI descibes a new syntax for Scheme, called I-expressions, whith equal descriptive power as S-expressions. The syntax uses indentation to group expressions, and has no special cases for semantic constructs of the language. It can be used both for program and data input.
> I guess you don't write Lisp. Semantic formatting is the antithesis of brevity, expressiveness, and beauty of code. S-expressions, on the other hand, deliberately make syntax not matter at all, by virtue of there being practically none.
...
Why do so many LISPers lack basic reading comprehension skills?
>>14
When you read two sentences with the word ``semantic'' in, do you automatically assume that they have any relation to each other at all? Because those two didn't.
Semantic formatting includes significant whitespace. Absolutely nothing to do with special cases in syntax.
Come on guy, did you even try or were you just finding any excuse to make sweeping judgements on the internet?
>>15
So whether something is "semantic formatting" is determined by what characters it uses? Parentheses are okay, but spaces are evil? Even though S-expressions also use spaces in a syntactically significant way?
>>17
You're clutching at straws now and you know it.