4 ms·

Is XML a markup language? Because it was often used for not that too.

AdieuToLogic 1y ago
> Is XML a markup language? Yes, the hint is in the name: Extensible Markup Language (XML)[0] 0 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XML
- hnlmorg 1y ago
  > Yes, the hint is in the name: > Extensible Markup Language Thats not an helpful answer when the reason for this discussion is whether MAML, another document format with the term “Markup Language” in its name, is also a markup language. ;)
  - xigoi 1y ago
    MAML is configuration format, not a document format, which is why the “ML” in its name is a misnomer.
    - throwaway150 1y ago
      Your parent comment (hnlmorg) already knows that "ML" in MAML is a misnomer. They are explaining why your grandparent comment (AdieuToLogic) does not explain very well why XML is a markup language but MAML isn't. Your GP comment says that XML has markup in the name so that's a hint that XML is a markup language. Well... so does MAML. But we all agree that MAML is not a markup language. So we can't just say that XML is a markup language because the hint is in the name. By that logic, MAML would be a markup language too but it isn't. We need a stronger argument to explain why XML is a markup language and MAML is not. Like XML can markup content but MAML cannot markup anything. That was your parent comment's point. This whole subthread has become an example of arguing for the sake of arguing. The messages in this subthread are correct on their own but missing the point of the parent comments.
  - AdieuToLogic 1y ago
    > Thats not an helpful answer when the reason for this discussion is ... I did not seek to answer anything other than the question posed and quoted: Is XML a markup language? Which it is.
oneeyedpigeon 1y ago
Occasional misuse doesn't change its nature. It seems as if MAML cannot be used as a markup language.
Skeime 1y ago
But XML was designed as a markup language. That is was often used for configuration is not its fault. (And it works much better for its original purpose, where the otherwise strange distinction between attributes and child nodes actually makes sense.) MAML seems to be designed as a configuration language, but calls itself a markup language. (YAML did too, but they changed it at some point.)
classified 1y ago
The "ML" in "XML" stands for Markup Language!
- OJFord 1y ago
  As it does in MAML.
  - classified 1y ago
    oneeyedpigeon put it succinctly: Occasional misuse doesn't change its nature. It seems as if MAML cannot be used as a markup language. The name "XML" stems form a time when the suffix "ML" hasn't been sufficiently perverted by ignoramuses to mean nothing any more.

> Is XML a markup language? Yes, the hint is in the name: Extensible Markup Language (XML)[0] 0 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XML

hnlmorg 1y ago
> Yes, the hint is in the name: > Extensible Markup Language Thats not an helpful answer when the reason for this discussion is whether MAML, another document format with the term “Markup Language” in its name, is also a markup language. ;)
- xigoi 1y ago
  MAML is configuration format, not a document format, which is why the “ML” in its name is a misnomer.
  - throwaway150 1y ago
    Your parent comment (hnlmorg) already knows that "ML" in MAML is a misnomer. They are explaining why your grandparent comment (AdieuToLogic) does not explain very well why XML is a markup language but MAML isn't. Your GP comment says that XML has markup in the name so that's a hint that XML is a markup language. Well... so does MAML. But we all agree that MAML is not a markup language. So we can't just say that XML is a markup language because the hint is in the name. By that logic, MAML would be a markup language too but it isn't. We need a stronger argument to explain why XML is a markup language and MAML is not. Like XML can markup content but MAML cannot markup anything. That was your parent comment's point. This whole subthread has become an example of arguing for the sake of arguing. The messages in this subthread are correct on their own but missing the point of the parent comments.
- AdieuToLogic 1y ago
  > Thats not an helpful answer when the reason for this discussion is ... I did not seek to answer anything other than the question posed and quoted: Is XML a markup language? Which it is.

oneeyedpigeon 1y ago

Occasional misuse doesn't change its nature. It seems as if MAML cannot be used as a markup language.

Skeime 1y ago

But XML was designed as a markup language. That is was often used for configuration is not its fault. (And it works much better for its original purpose, where the otherwise strange distinction between attributes and child nodes actually makes sense.) MAML seems to be designed as a configuration language, but calls itself a markup language. (YAML did too, but they changed it at some point.)

classified 1y ago

The "ML" in "XML" stands for Markup Language!

OJFord 1y ago
As it does in MAML.
- classified 1y ago
  oneeyedpigeon put it succinctly: Occasional misuse doesn't change its nature. It seems as if MAML cannot be used as a markup language. The name "XML" stems form a time when the suffix "ML" hasn't been sufficiently perverted by ignoramuses to mean nothing any more.