Better Markup Languages
I used to be a big fan of XML and I’ve realized that while it definitely has its place, there it has been misused the vast majority of the time.
What is interesting is that when I did work with XML, one area that it seemed to excel in my mind was for document type content. I don’t mean documents as in JSON and CouchDB, but actual documents like blog posts, articles, books, etc.
It would make sense then that I would think HTML is a good arena for XML-ish content, but I’m getting to the point where I’m not sure this is the case. Recently, I took a look at HAML and SASS. I didn’t try using them, but simply went through the docs and got a better idea what the actual markup might look like. The inherit link to Ruby was actually appealing because using it in Rails made so much sense.
Getting rid of the angle brackets in the template language (ERB I think) really improved the templates and made things feel like Ruby.
Being a Pythonista, I wondered where’s the Python version.
While I didn’t find a port, I did find SHPAML. It seemed really similar, so I tried writing a few examples. My first impression was that the syntax would make for a great template library. After talking to some folks about this, it became clear integrating it into another template library would make sense. Lo and behold Mako had a preprocessor argument that let you do things like run a function on the template content before passing it to the Mako processor. Adding that argument let me immediately integrate SHPAML and Mako. It was way too easy.
The templates looked nice. They did need a bit of getting used to, but overall, they were really simple. Today I saw a blog about how HAML it is bad for content. It makes a ton of sense. In fact, that is why I write my blogs in Emacs using webblogger.el. I get to write like I’m writing an email, yet I don’t have any of the email client to HTML cruft that always seems to be a problem.
I still think XML has its place, but honestly that place is becoming harder and harder for me to find. At this point, I’m going to suggest it can make for a good interchange format, but even then I’m not sure where something like JSON and conventions wouldn’t be a better place to start.
What is making a ton of sense is optimizing templates for the purpose of the markup. I know HTML is not going anywhere any time soon and HTML makes for an OK output format. But, it doesn’t mean you need to author in HTML. This has been common for actual content, but I think for templates you can get some advantages using something like HAML or SHPAML. Likewise, using something like Markdown or reStructuredText for actual content is another way to optimize the document formats.
The gain is subtle, but important. It is just a little nicer writing a SHPAML file. It is not so large a difference that you never want to write HTML again, but it is enough that the code makes a little more sense. Personally, while it increases the complexity of the tool chain, it reduces the complexity of the actual code being written. In this case, I think the hidden complexity is worth it if you can understand the templates faster. C did the same thing with machine code, so it is the same thing here. If you’ve looked at these sorts of tools before and dismissed them, I’d suggest taking another look and actually try it.
While it is a question of taste, I believe more people might enjoy the markup tools more than they expect.