From: Clark C . E. <cc...@cl...> - 2002-08-09 16:57:20
|
On Fri, Aug 09, 2002 at 09:22:30AM +0000, sh...@zi... wrote: | > (#): Comment | > (=): &0 Migration value | | I don't think either of these belongs in YAML. I was considering taking it out of the spec altogether, but replacing this section with a pointer to a (stuff) registry where we control in an IANA like manner a set of special values, like (true) and (false) in a uniform manner. The question is, what does a parser do when it runs into a (thingy) that it doesn't recognize. (on) => !bool 1 and such, so (thingy) isn't a type family as much as its an escape hatch for stuff which doesn't fit into our basic recognition system. | Basically, the "=" creates a fourth pseudotype in YAML, which is the complex-thingy-that-can-look-like-a-scalar datatype. If I had to pick a fourth pseudotype for YAML, a dictionary-where-keys-have-a-specific-sort-order would be much higher on the list. Yes. But it is at a higher layer, and thus you are quite correct to think that it perhaps shouldn't be in this specification. | As for the "#", I just have two words to say: | NO COMMENT! Once again, I think it would be valueable; just not perhaps in the specification proper. A registry for this stuff would be neat; but I can't figure out what to do if a parser doesn't recognize a particular special type... I guess just tossing an error would be sufficient. | Actually, the most intriguing special key to me is the inheritance key, since that would allow YAML to express the contents of related data structures a lot more elegantly. But I would also put this feature to the "lurker test." Nods. But once again, since this isn't reflected in our information model, it should really go into our "registry" of sorts. Best, Clark |