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