XML as a transition to s-expr (Re: What is a lightweight language)

[Bruce Lewis <address@hidden>]

Paul Prescod <paul@prescod.net> writes:

> There are very few users of XML that try to make it into a programming
> language. Even XSLT was not intended to be anything like a general
> purpose programming language.

We're on the same page here.  I don't intend to set up a head-to-head
competition between XSLT and BRL.  

> So the most apt comparison is not really with XML (even XSLT) but more
> with PHP or ASP.

Those would be more appropriate for a "Ditch ___; BRL is better"
argument.  But that's not what I want to do here.  I want to talk about
how BRL (the s-expr flavor I care about most) can gain users.

I don't think it's by converting PHP or ASP users.  They don't want to
throw away the effort they've put into those tools.  I don't think it's
by getting elite hackers to use BRL, as would be Paul Graham's formula.
I think it's by getting web site authors without prior programming
experience.

I don't want to make such people stop using XML or HTML.  I merely want
to leverage their knowledge of those syntaxes as a transition into
s-expr syntax.

-- 
<brlewis@[(if (brl-related? message)    ; Bruce R. Lewis
              "users.sourceforge.net"   ; http://brl.sourceforge.net/
              "alum.mit.edu")]>