|
|
|
|
|
by bowsamic
532 days ago
|
|
The article seems to simply assume that only programming languages have value, then argue that since HTML has value, that it is a programming language. EDIT: It's a very common logical confusion. Just because someone says "HTML is bad because it's not a programming language" but you think HTML is good doesn't mean that HTML is a programming language. The first person could just be wrong about there being a connection between badness and not being a programming language. It's a shame the entire article is written based on this error |
|
For SQL you are not instructing the computer what to do, you're describing the rules and structure of the result that you want in some coded language such that an execution engine can determine how to deliver the expected result.
For HTML you're not instructing the renderer what to do, you're describing the rules and structure of the result that you want in some coded language such that the rendering engine can determine how to deliver the expected result.
If I'm wrong, I would be very happy to be corrected because I've argued this for a long time with people who don't know what a programming language paradigm is - so I'd like to know if I'm mistaken.