From ...
From: Erik Naggum <erik@naggum.no>
Subject: Re: Lisp XML parser ?
Date: 2000/06/27
Message-ID: <3171079864364898@naggum.no>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 639493669
References: <39523341.CED20EE@bbn.com> <3170682110777797@naggum.no> <3dm3kuya.fsf@supelec.fr> <3170880537253039@naggum.no> <u2eidnva.fsf@supelec.fr> <3170921063858188@naggum.no> <pHT55.221953$701.2930569@news4.giganews.com>
mail-copies-to: never
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Complaints-To: newsmaster@eunet.no
X-Trace: oslo-nntp.eunet.no 962100394 11114 195.0.192.66 (27 Jun 2000 10:06:34 GMT)
Organization: Naggum Software; vox: +47 8800 8879; fax: +47 8800 8601; http://www.naggum.no
User-Agent: Gnus/5.0803 (Gnus v5.8.3) Emacs/20.7
Mime-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: 27 Jun 2000 10:06:34 GMT
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp

* Christopher Browne
| Don't Lisp programs suffer from the same problem?

  No.  Lisp programs do not exist outside of the language definition.

| (CAR WHATEVER) derives meaning from whatever external meaning you've
| attached to whatever is in the sequence WHATEVER.

  Nonsense.  car has defined meaning regardless of what whatever is,
  and the whole form has defined meaning regardless of which operator
  is in the first position.

| To be sure, DTDs are not as useful in determining semantics as one
| might _want_ them to be, but they _do_ provide _some_ indication of
| meaning.

  Like what?

#:Erik
-- 
  If this is not what you expected, please alter your expectations.