From: Tom Sawyer <transami@tr...> - 2002-08-25 14:24:17
just read the schema thread. i have some familiarity with this endeavor
as i wrote my own schema for xml called xml:Proof (my implementation is
in Ruby using REXML)
(FYI - i haven't gotten back to it to put the final touches on b/c i
anyhow, i will acutally be creating a YAML schema soon along similiar
lines. you can see from it that i am in agreement with the idea of
document =~ schema. i.e. the schema should reflect the document.
in xml/proof i used regular expressions as the primary means of
validation. but what's this about EBNF? i take it that's a more powerful
solution? is it as compact?
Tom Sawyer wrote:
> in xml/proof i used regular expressions as the primary means of
> validation. but what's this about EBNF? i take it that's a more powerful
> solution? is it as compact?
EBNF (or sort of) is what is used in the YAML spec to define the