I promised an update to the XMILE documents and here it is just in time to discuss at the ISDC conference. I have said many times that this is getting implemented in iThink and STELLA. After many delays, I can now honestly say we have started. We expect full level 1 support and partial level 2 support in our next release.
The discussions around XMILE often deteriorate into taking completely different tacks or starting over again or incorporating other paradigms into XMILE. I think the latter is great if we can do it, but not as a first step. The push for standards has been going on for at least 6 years and our users want it. Are we going to continue to delay this so long that we prove Len correct - that the vendors will never do this?
I am looking for constructive criticism about the basic language and the XML implementation. These documents are not complete; I needed about another week to wrap up my thoughts.
Note the macro language is now Turing-complete. The SMILE language is as well, although that is not completely defined yet in XMILE (an additional option is needed).
I also took a controversial tack and made MathML optional. I think it should be supported, but at the user's discretion, as it bloats the file and we have a clear syntax defined for SMILE equations. Open source parsers for the syntax can be made available in several languages, so why force the overhead of MathML in all cases?
I have also enclosed some examples.
Happy reading,
Karim
