Mailing List Archive: 49091 messages
  • Home
  • Script library
  • AltME Archive
  • Mailing list
  • Articles Index
  • Site search
 

FAQ at REBOL Republic

 [1/17] from: kolla::nvg::ntnu::no at: 14-Apr-2001 3:47


On Fri, 13 Apr 2001, <[norsepower--uswest--net]> wrote:
> 3. Being able to say "I write applications using XML" looks good on a resume. > Most employers don't know from XML from BMX, but they feel they *need* XML > and so it looks better on a resume to use XML verses native REBOL storage > methods.
Hehe... maybe one should put BMX on the CV as well :) -- kolla

 [2/17] from: rgaither:triad:rr at: 13-Apr-2001 8:31


>> > Anyways, the current problem I have with %messages.cgi is all data is >stored as XML files and the data is loaded using load/markup. This makes it
<<quoted lines omitted: 4>>
>I agree. It's easier writing Rebol script or a dialect directly. And it's >far, far, far more understandable.
Reasons for XML as a data storage format: 1. Open standard (just the basic structure rules) 2. Language independent. 3. Tool support in many languages and environments. 4. Better web integration options in many situations If you use a Rebol script or dialect for a Rebol friendly storage format then that is the only language that works with it. That is quite a limitation to live with currently. My .02, Rod. Rod Gaither Oak Ridge, NC - USA [rgaither--triad--rr--com]

 [3/17] from: norsepower:uswest at: 13-Apr-2001 7:02


I'm using XML because: 1. When I began developing Messages a long time ago, there was no support in /Core for databases. Even now, MySQL is the only "supported" database, but not officially supported. 2. Portability. I COULD save the the data as make object! statements, but if I keep them in XML and need to use some other language in the future to access the data, it should be fairly simple (but not as simple as using REBOL, I know.) 3. Being able to say "I write applications using XML" looks good on a resume. Most employers don't know from XML from BMX, but they feel they *need* XML and so it looks better on a resume to use XML verses native REBOL storage methods.

 [4/17] from: norsepower:uswest at: 13-Apr-2001 7:03


>> Why are you using XML? > >I agree. It's easier writing Rebol script or a dialect directly. And it's >far, far, far more understandable.
I'm only using XML as a storage medium.

 [5/17] from: jeff:rebol at: 13-Apr-2001 8:54


Howdy, Rod: Just some devil's advocacy:
> Reasons for XML as a data storage format: > > 1. Open standard (just the basic structure rules)
Definitely needs the qualifier. What we'll have is some massive pot of different XML definitions, protocols, etc.. so tools will be able to trudge through the stuff but not understand what they're trudging through most of the time, unless taught to. At least it makes a whole lot more work for people! :-)
> 2. Language independent.
Except when XML mutates into different languages. (-:
> 3. Tool support in many languages and environments.
The brunt seems to be with Java. Most everything else seems to me to be comparatively thin support. Does that jibe with what you see?
> 4. Better web integration options in many situations > > If you use a Rebol script or dialect for a Rebol friendly > storage format then that is the only language that works > with it. That is quite a limitation to live with > currently.
REBOL can spit out stuff that many other languages and tools grok, though. -jeff

 [6/17] from: rgaither:triad:rr at: 13-Apr-2001 12:47


Hi Jeff,
> Just some devil's advocacy:
That makes for a healthy discussion! :-)
>> 1. Open standard (just the basic structure rules) > Definitely needs the qualifier. What we'll have is some
<<quoted lines omitted: 3>>
> time, unless taught to. At least it makes a whole lot more > work for people! :-)
Yes it does need the qualifier. I see value in many of the definitions and "protocols" but that isn't for this discussion. The key here is for "Me" not "Anyone" to be able to take the same data and use whatever tool is available or is best suited to accomplish some goal. That goal may be a desktop interface, a web interface, an automated search procedure, and so on. I know the "structure" so am not trudging through it for each of these situations, but rather getting the value out of describing my data independently of the tools operating on it.
>> 2. Language independent. > > Except when XML mutates into different languages. (-:
I really am talking about using XML in its "Descriptive" capacity, not its myriad "Functional" layerings.
>> 3. Tool support in many languages and environments. > > The brunt seems to be with Java. Most everything else seems > to me to be comparatively thin support. Does that jibe with > what you see?
No, try this list. Perl, Python, PHP, Java, Progress, Delphi, C++, and I suspect many others I'm not familiar with.
>> 4. Better web integration options in many situations >>
<<quoted lines omitted: 4>>
> REBOL can spit out stuff that many other languages and tools > grok, though.
Thanks for backing up my point! :-) I like REBOL to "do" things but I can't see its native output format as a big picture solution. Thanks, Rod. Rod Gaither Oak Ridge, NC - USA [rgaither--triad--rr--com]

 [7/17] from: jeff:rebol at: 13-Apr-2001 10:00


Howdy, Rod:
> >> 3. Tool support in many languages and environments. > >
<<quoted lines omitted: 4>>
> Perl, Python, PHP, Java, Progress, Delphi, C++, and I > suspect many others I'm not familiar with.
Okay, this was how it looked to me last time I investigated: Perl, Python, PHP all use the same xml parser -- expat, a non-validating SAX parser. That, or they offer other non-validating native implementations. Java has JAXP, the interchangable parser, numerous validating parsers (both SAX and DOM), strong XML support from IBM, and more. So when I say "comparatively thin", I mean thin compared to Java. -jeff

 [8/17] from: rgaither:triad:rr at: 13-Apr-2001 14:06


Hi Jeff,
>Okay, this was how it looked to me last time I investigated: >Perl, Python, PHP all use the same xml parser -- expat, a
<<quoted lines omitted: 5>>
>So when I say "comparatively thin", I mean thin compared to >Java.
In that sense then the list becomes Java, C++, Delphi, Progress all having the full blown parsers. Some of these are even getting a jump on some of the critical "new" standards layered on top of XML such as XSLT, XPath, X yada-yada-yada. :-) Yes, the others lack the validating portion which can be significant in full XML support. As a basic text based data format though even the "thin" options provide usable support. Support which those tools don't have for native REBOL output. I'm not ignoring the points Carl made earlier about the semantic problem being deeper than what XML is easily handling. Given time, proper product positioning, and some of that "standardized" way of interacting, REBOL could beat XML to a viable, distributed solution. In the mean time :-) REBOL needs to work very well with the technologies that are already in place. One such area is XML as a "descriptive" data format, HTML as presentation markup, rdbm systems for storage, internet protocols, ... As you can see - RT is doing an excellent job on most of these fronts, and I expect it will only get better. Though REBOL needs a killer app or two to get people aware of it as a name and a technology that creates valuable solutions! FWIW, Rod. Rod Gaither Oak Ridge, NC - USA [rgaither--triad--rr--com]

 [9/17] from: ryan:christiansen:intellisol at: 12-Apr-2001 16:23


The REBOL FAQ at Rebol Republic has begun. What I will do is work backwards from today on the rebol-list threads at eScribe to put together the FAQ. If anyone wants to volunteer to help with this HUGE effort, it would be greatly appreciated. See the FAQ at http://www.fargonews.com/rebolrepublic/ The rebolrepublic.org domain should work within 48 hours. Why am I doing this? 1. I want to see REBOL not only flourish, but survive. Unfortunately, it is a closed-source language and if REBOL Technologies dies, so will the language (I assume.) For those of you who know me from the BeOS community, you know I am willing to put a lot of free time into something I believe in. Unfortunately, the BeOS is dying and, being a closed-source technology, as well, the BeOS can never be revived by the people who love and use it. The BeOS is only slightly more than abandonware. I appreciate wholeheartedly the fact REBOL Technologies has continued to update /Core and /View for the BeOS, including for PowerPC. Let's hope we never see REBOL disappear due to economic pressures and the fact it is closed source technology. 2. I want to learn more about REBOL. I'm absolutely not the best REBOLer on this list, but I will learn more by doing this. Ryan C. Christiansen Web Developer Intellisol International 4733 Amber Valley Parkway Fargo, ND 58104 701-235-3390 ext. 6671 FAX: 701-235-9940 http://www.intellisol.com Global Leader in People Performance Software _____________________________________ Confidentiality Notice This message may contain privileged and confidential information. If you think, for any reason, that this message may have been addressed to you in error, you must not disseminate, copy or take any action in reliance on it, and we would ask you to notify us immediately by return email to [ryan--christiansen--intellisol--com]

 [10/17] from: gchiu:compkarori at: 13-Apr-2001 10:19


On Thu, 12 Apr 2001 16:23:42 -0500 [ryan--christiansen--intellisol--com] wrote:
> The REBOL FAQ at Rebol Republic has begun. What I will do > is work backwards
<<quoted lines omitted: 4>>
> greatly appreciated. See the FAQ at > http://www.fargonews.com/rebolrepublic/
Hi Ryan, Are you writing your own FAQ tool, or using an existing one? Will casual visitors be able to add to the FAQ ( questions and answers ) ? -- Graham Chiu

 [11/17] from: bga:din:uem at: 12-Apr-2001 19:40


Em Thursday, April 12 2001, 18:23:42, [ryan--christiansen--intellisol--com] ([ryan--christiansen--intellisol--com]) disse:
>1. I want to see REBOL not only flourish, but survive. Unfortunately, it is >a closed-source language and if REBOL Technologies dies, so will the
<<quoted lines omitted: 7>>
>REBOL disappear due to economic pressures and the fact it is closed source >technology.
No, it's not. Be Inc. is facing financial problems as every .com company that opened its shares is. Take a look at NaN (the guys that did Blender), for example. BeOS is not dead. I'm sorry for posting this to this list, specially that it's not directly related to BeOS, but I think I should make it clear in case the guys at REBOL Technologies started wondering if it's true. -Bruno -- Bruno G. Albuquerque [bga--din--uem--br] BeDevId #15362 Grupo Brasileiro de Usuários de BeOS - Presidente http://www.bug-br.org.br Any philosophy that can be put in a nutshell belongs there. -- Sydney J. Harris

 [12/17] from: norsepower:uswest at: 12-Apr-2001 18:03


Sorry, Bruno. You're correct. My emotions got away from me. This happens to me for both BeOS and REBOL. :)

 [13/17] from: norsepower:uswest at: 12-Apr-2001 17:32


Graham- Eventually the FAQ will be run using the same engine as the news, namely my Messages script (see earlier posts.) :) Anyways, the current problem I have with %messages.cgi is all data is stored as XML files and the data is loaded using load/markup. This makes it impossible to store HTML tags in the data, especially tags such as <A> and < CODE> or <PRE>, necessary for an FAQ. I need to replace the simple load/markup mechanism with a smarter parser. Then the FAQ will be run the same as the news and will include a way to post new FAQs and even to comment on FAQs.

 [14/17] from: carl:rebol at: 12-Apr-2001 19:03


Why are you using XML?

 [15/17] from: al:bri:xtra at: 13-Apr-2001 14:43


> > Anyways, the current problem I have with %messages.cgi is all data is
stored as XML files and the data is loaded using load/markup. This makes it impossible to store HTML tags in the data, especially tags such as <A> and <CODE> or <PRE>, necessary for an FAQ. Carl wrote:
> Why are you using XML?
I agree. It's easier writing Rebol script or a dialect directly. And it's far, far, far more understandable. Andrew Martin Not stuttering at all... ICQ: 26227169 http://members.nbci.com/AndrewMartin/

 [16/17] from: warp:reboot:ch at: 15-Apr-2001 2:13


yea..I would buy any book written by Jeff! 8-) Will

 [17/17] from: jeff:rebol at: 16-Apr-2001 9:07


Howdy, Will: What a nice thing to say! :-) Thanks! (Though I don't know that the sentence you quoted below is the best example of good writing-- (-; hahaha!)

Notes
  • Quoted lines have been omitted from some messages.
    View the message alone to see the lines that have been omitted