Real Men use XML, was quote, was Google Earth...
Bill Ricker
bill.n1vux at gmail.com
Tue Nov 14 23:28:23 EST 2006
> What XML gives you is a standard way to define the structure,
> schema, and so on, in a way that is unambiguous and machine-friendly.
Right. And if you do NOT create a X-Schema or DTD, and are using a
non-validating parser, and then have to write code to explore the DOM
generated from whatever XML it receives, you've given up 80% of the
advantage.
XHTML recaptulates HTML's errors of mixing presentation with contenat
AND of accepting invalid syntax forgivingly.
> As others have said, the major benefit to this is you don't have to
> write a new parser and validator every time you create a new data
> structure. You just use the pre-existing XML library.
AND USE THE VALIDATOR.
> That being said, the hype behind XML is largely, well, hype. But
> that's nothing new, either. I'm still waiting for my flying car.
Yup.
The real win is PORTABLE , multiplatform, choice of parser
implementations that will accept a standard Schema (or DTD)
definition.
> Currently, XML is fostering some improvements in the area of open
> data formats.
A very good thing.
> While XML does lend itself to this well, I personally
> think it is more a coincidence than anything else.
It's more than a coincidence, the availability of open-source
parser/validators and viewers makes it a viable basis for
standards-mongers.
> XML just happened
> to be in the right place at the right time. We're fortunate we got
> XML, and not something truely awful like DER or OLE Container
> Documents or something.
Yeah.
> I'm hoping the magic pixie dust currently associated with XML keeps
> the momentum behind open data formats going.
Yeah
--
Bill
n1vux at arrl.net bill.n1vux at gmail.com
More information about the gnhlug-discuss
mailing list