[uf-discuss] xdmp profiles not enough for parsing?

Dr. Ernie Prabhakar drernie at opendarwin.org
Wed Nov 16 08:24:55 PST 2005

Hi Tantek,

On Nov 16, 2005, at 7:57 AM, Tantek Çelik wrote:
> The conclusion was, in practice, complete automatic generic  
> parsability is
> futile, and thus not worth pursuing, in XMDP or any other schema like
> language.

I'll buy that, but that doesn't mean that we can't do *better*, right?

I like David's suggestion that we try to identify what additional  
semantics _might_ make it *easier* to write the current generation of  
parsers.   It may not be completely general, but that doesn't mean it  
wouldn't be useful, right?

I agree that we'll probably never have enough for a completely  
general automatic parser, but hopefully we can at least make it  
easier on human parser-writers...

-- Ernie P.
Ernest N. Prabhakar, Ph.D. <drernie at opendarwin.org>
Ex-Physicist, Marketing Weenie, and Dilettante Hacker
Probe-Hacker blog: http://www.opendarwin.org/~drernie/

More information about the microformats-discuss mailing list