I think all of this debate hangs on the defnition of "programming language" that you subscribe to.
If you say that a language must be turing complete then HTML isn't but things like Coq that for what I've heard due to their type system must have te program halt meaning that is not turing complete.
However if you define that any language that ultimately ends with the computer doing something by the commands given in the language then yes HTML would be.
I think this boils down to the individual, I fall a bit in the turing camp but with Coq's ability to compile down to haskell I would consider theorem proofers like that valid programming languages.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
I think all of this debate hangs on the defnition of "programming language" that you subscribe to.
If you say that a language must be turing complete then HTML isn't but things like Coq that for what I've heard due to their type system must have te program halt meaning that is not turing complete.
However if you define that any language that ultimately ends with the computer doing something by the commands given in the language then yes HTML would be.
I think this boils down to the individual, I fall a bit in the turing camp but with Coq's ability to compile down to haskell I would consider theorem proofers like that valid programming languages.