Re: Idea of future enhancement of WML - Environment

[Denis Barbier <nospam@thanx>]

On Sun, Jun 25, 2000 at 11:29:56AM +0200, Franz Knipp wrote:

> On Sat, 24 Jun 2000, Denis Barbier wrote:
> > i do not like this idea, because it is very confusing. And i could not
> > imagine the benefits of this approach. Could you send a nice example?
> 
> Ok - I'll try:
[...]
> This way we can offer a syntax more like OOP - the name of the `methods´
> (<box>, <text>, <picture>) remains to be the same in different `objects´
> (<red>, <blue>).
> 
> Do you get the idea? I see a lot of benefits (smarter writing, changed
> behaviour depending on the context, ...) and no disadvantages (because it
> is fully backward compatible).

The disadvantage is that one function has different behaviours depending
on the context, which may be confusing.

Anyway you can do it right now a la LaTeX:
   <define-tag red:text>...</define-tag>
   <define-tag blue:text>...</define-tag>
   <define-tag default:text>...</define-tag>
   <define-tag red endtag=required whitespace=delete>
     <let text=red:text>
     %body
     <let text=default:text>
   </define-tag>
   <define-tag blue endtag=required whitespace=delete>
     <let text=blue:text>
     %body
     <let text=default:text>
   </define-tag>

Maybe we could merge this discussion with the one on namespaces, i
believe they are very similar.

-- 
Denis Barbier
WML Maintainer
______________________________________________________________________
Website META Language (WML)                www.engelschall.com/sw/wml/
Official Support Mailing List                   sw-wml@engelschall.com
Automated List Manager                       majordomo@engelschall.com