[uf-discuss] xdmp profiles not enough for parsing?
Dr. Ernie Prabhakar
drernie at opendarwin.org
Wed Nov 16 08:24:55 PST 2005
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
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