Following proper XML spec always led to more problems than what they were meant to solve. Sometimes I use XML, but just the syntax with a more html5 style to it

Following proper XML spec always led to more problems than what they were meant to solve. Sometimes I use XML, but just the syntax with a more html5 style to it. Similar to defaulting to error-ing on extra tags, I never got the point of making everything an element and adding extra redundant attributes. That's really just the result of XML that's automatically generated. Like the `<element... type="string">` in your example of classic XML, why not just use `<a>3</a>` or `<a int="3"/>`. XML proper styles still suggest the classic long/autogenerated form. Writing XML in html5 style like `<my-a data-value="3" />` makes it much friendlier. Or as I tend to use it for various internal protocols to wrap multiple CSV data in a file: <some-data type"csv" columns="A, B, C"> 1.3, 3.4, 5.6 1.3, 3.4, 5.6 </some-data> Technically That's really just html5 in a file I guess. :-) But html parsers also don't tend to complain about extra tags too.