Re: XQuery (and XML) vs LISP

On 21 Feb 2006 09:27:18 -0800, "Marshall Spight" <marshall.spight_at_gmail.com> wrote:

>Mark Johnson wrote:
>>
>> But isn't that an admission of what you seemed to want to deny, that
>> texts typically include rather trivial and meaningless examples, for
>> whatever reasons? You seem to suggest that useful insight and examples
>> must necessary cost much more to purchase? Or are you simply
>> complaining of the present costs now associated with short run
>> professional texts, which have suffered an inflationary run of perhaps
>> an order of magnitude in the last quarter century or more?
>
>This has reached the point of being completely off-topic for
>this newsgroup. I don't know of a good newsgroup for
>this sort of discussion, but if you wish to continue this
>line of conversation, I would ask you to take it somewhere
>else where it will be on-topic.

     How theory is taught is relevant. Given the number of arguments over terminology, that should be obvious.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko Received on Tue Feb 21 2006 - 20:39:43 CET