Danny Yoo wrote at 08/22/2011 02:31 AM:
It looks like you're trying to standardize the particular s-expression representation we'll be using for XML in Racket. Is there a practical difference between SXML and xexp?
They are very similar. We've had a few discussion threads on this email list about the differences over the years. Here's one such thread: http://lists.racket-lang.org/users/archive/2011-February/044478.html
I'm not trying to change the standard way. My immediate goal, in a spirit of The Perfect is the Enemy of the Good, was to simply push these packages out, since they've been sitting around unreleased for over three years. They were unreleased partly because I was going back and forth between SXML and xexpr and my own extensions to both, and trying to unify them. Recent changes made to the Racket Web Server to make it less married to xexprs helped push me back to SXML. (Sadly, I'd already deleted some subtle bits of SXML-specific permissiveness code by that point.) I could still go back to adding compatibility with xexprs, but I think more likely is that people using xexprs will decide to use SXML.
Here's one reason for SXML over xexprs: in the Scheme world, SXML is the de facto standard, and the best XML/HTML tools that Racket inherited from Scheme are all based on SXML.
I intend for a later version of the documentation of the "neil/xexp" package to document the entire format, so that people don't have to Google around.
-- http://www.neilvandyke.org/ _________________________________________________ For list-related administrative tasks: http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/users
