[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Should nXML be included
From: |
Peter Heslin |
Subject: |
Re: Should nXML be included |
Date: |
Tue, 12 Jun 2007 14:42:49 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.93 (gnu/linux) |
"Lennart Borgman (gmail)" <address@hidden> writes:
> Validation of course loose most of its meanings, but not
> all. Completion can still be used. In fact that is what I do in nXhtml
> with nxhtml-mode + mumamo-mode. To be able to make it more cleanly
> than currently the parser must be broken out.
As you know, another possibility is to put the php code into CDATA
sections so that nxml ignores it; and when you want to edit that code,
narrow the buffer temporarily to that section and switch to php-mode.
In any case, the viability of multiple major modes in a single buffer is
a much larger issue which does not really impact the question of whether
nxml should be included with Emacs.
Peter
--
Peter Heslin (http://www.dur.ac.uk/p.j.heslin)
- Should nXML be included, Leo, 2007/06/11
- Re: Should nXML be included, Lennart Borgman (gmail), 2007/06/12
- Re: Should nXML be included, Jason Rumney, 2007/06/12
- Re: Should nXML be included, Lennart Borgman (gmail), 2007/06/12
- Re: Should nXML be included,
Peter Heslin <=
- Re: Should nXML be included, Jason Rumney, 2007/06/12
- Multiple major modes (was: Should nXML be included), Stefan Monnier, 2007/06/12
- Re: Multiple major modes, Leo, 2007/06/12
- Re: Multiple major modes, Lennart Borgman (gmail), 2007/06/12
- Re[2]: Multiple major modes, Eric M. Ludlam, 2007/06/12
- Re: Multiple major modes, Lennart Borgman (gmail), 2007/06/12
- Re: Multiple major modes, Stefan Monnier, 2007/06/12
- Re: Multiple major modes, Richard Stallman, 2007/06/13
- Re: Multiple major modes, Richard Stallman, 2007/06/13
- Re[2]: Multiple major modes, Eric M. Ludlam, 2007/06/19