4 ms·
Not for me, but still voting it up because I was curious enough to click the link =P It is exactly as sharp and pointy as I had feared - but then again, XML wa
by sidsavara 18y ago
Not for me, but still voting it up because I was curious enough to click the link =P
It is exactly as sharp and pointy as I had feared - but then again, XML was never meant to be looked at by humans right? Isn't the point that it's easy to traverse and build tools around?
An XML based language would definitely aid in creating more visual IDEs. I suspect the example they give could be done easily in Yahoo pipes, and is likewise stored in a similar XML document.
- michaelneale 18y ago>but then again, XML was never meant to be looked at by humans right? Actually I think it was, in as far as it is a text markup language. The only case when I have enjoyed looking at it, and editing is docbook - where its mostly text, just with limited docbook XML markup (and having the redundant closing tags does help you navigate).
- newt0311 18y agoI personally prefer docbook SGML. Its much more forgiving when it comes to end tags which can be inferred. Also, sometimes the case insensitivity is nice.
- axod 18y agoThing is, it's not easy to traverse and build tools around... You can write a json encoder/decoder in a few lines of code. XML libraries run to a fair few lines and are pretty complex beasts.