[REBOL] Re: Interesting Article on repurposing software
From: maximo:meteorstudios at: 29-Oct-2003 9:10
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gregg Irwin [mailto:[greggirwin--mindspring--com]]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2003 5:55 PM
> To: MeF
> Subject: [REBOL] Re: Interesting Article on repurposing software
> Hi M&F,
> M> So the only thing I can see here important is that
> document content is
> M> really what matter and XML can easily make you parse
> through it without
> M> messing around with the layout and appareance. The sort of
> thing it was
> M> though for.
> Right, the big bonus I see with REBOL is that your data format can be
> much easier for people to work with--and no more difficult for
> machines--than XML.
If I may give an example, when I received data from a univercity for seismic vibration,
I was able to do a load directly on the file !!!
it seems that for most humans the use of
makes a lot of sense and basically, I had a huge block with a fixed number of items which
maked up the header. I know I was lucky, but still, the fact that rebol is capable of
determining the datatype of file contents simply by its written form makes all file handling
> Behind the scenes, we can generate whatever we want, but from an
> interaction perspective, what is the best solution or the most natural
> way to work with this kind of information? That's where I'm
> coming from. For example, how would a dialected REBOL solution compare
> to a GUI built with Java that generates the XSL, and eventually
> produces an XML file which is then repurposed?
The system does seem to innovate in that you do not seem to need a template layout file
to create the output but rather, a master converter which uses contexts to decide how
to layout the output. What I find is the problem, is that you then get a universaly
bland expression of all the data. basically, They decide how any given context will
generate output and then just feed data to it.
that actually looks alot like a dialect to me. Its a programed engine which reacts to
fed data. Although there only really seems to be the make-doc (and better variants)
specification in terms of rebol-centric file specification, you can still create different
output engines, its just someone still needs to program the output module, they are not
There might be one which already exists which outputs to a view application, but I'm
basically, with rebol, (being portable, small and complete) there is no need for a hundred
megabyte shamefully large monster to maintain. and also, because it has view, it can
easily do more than JUST create a static file, with the data. It could open a window
and start a MM presentation...
in rebol, creating a write once publish many engine is child's play. simply because
data is more than simple content. it includes structure and can even contain actual processing
which will only be done once the context is known. So instead of putting actual data,
you could just insert a litle block of code which will be executed on the client. This
is easy since it does not need MBs of shit to perform. just a few words can do a lot.
If I use remark.r as an example, I can reformat the data to a completely different site
within one evening. This includes changing the menuing layout, gfx, actual look, and
even some of the contents throughout the whole site sithout changing any of the src pages.
The whole thing is built in html-like syntax, but because you can add your own tags,
creating many of the more advanced layouts, like the news actualy is just one tag with
content. remark does all the rest, and it can react to context. If it where built within
a cgi framework, then it could effectively be even more flexible.
The content does not change, but its interpretation is volatile.
my 2 cents