Re: Inline macros

David Ornstein (davido@objarts.com)
Thu, 25 Apr 1996 15:15:14 -0700


Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960425221514.00de2c80@mail.objarts.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 1996 15:15:14 -0700
To: erik <erik@inch.com>, Foteos Macrides <MACRIDES@sci.wfbr.edu>
From: David Ornstein <davido@objarts.com>
Subject: Re: Inline macros
Cc: www-html@w3.org

At 05:39 PM 4/25/96 -0400, erik wrote:

>This syntax is comletely unacceptable for a language which may 
>have </script> or other non-sgml sequences embedded within the 
>script.
>
>All we need to do is then add a separator tag to 
><script>....this would prevent this from occurring in the cases 
>where a language may not be SGML compatible.
>
>The lexer would have to "shift gears" after encountering a 
><script> tag with a separator.

As I said before, I'd *like* to avoid having a lexer have to know about the
tags it's dealing with.  Could we use a combination of techniques like this?

<script type=txt/smalltalk>
<![ CDATA [
        Transcript show: 'This is a cool idea'.
        Disk format.
]]>
</script>

I don't much like all the funny punctuation, but it substantially eases the
burden on the parser/lexer and allows for more sophisicated systems to be
built...

Or one could do something along the lines of the <object> proposal that
Foteos referenced (could someone send me a good URL for this proposal so I
can finally read it?):

<object
       id="smalltalk"
       classid="progid:Smalltalk"
       codebase="http://www.vendor.com/bin.smalltalk.cab"
>
</object>
<script SCRIPTENGINE="#smalltalkl">
<![ CDATA [
        Transcript show: 'This is a cool idea'.
        Disk format.
]]>
</script>