Thank you for this, I have bookmarked it for future reference! I've always made the second part of your argument: that namespaces are the key feature that make

Thank you for this, I have bookmarked it for future reference! I've always made the second part of your argument: that namespaces are the key feature that make XML useful, especially for the eXtensibility in XMPP. I also think that namespaces are a part of XML that few people understand, partially because many XML/XMPP implementations don't even (fully/correctly) support them. The rest of what you say is new though! The solid examples you gave for compactness/ordering were impressively concise. I'd even go further and say they generally illustrate the difficult readability that can arise in JSON with not-so-difficult requirements--I had more trouble following the JSON than the XML here, by far. I'd say the embedded comments and possibility of a schema in XML are also a bonus, to help understand the meaning if it isn't obvious. I am by no means an XML-supremicist, but I do take the unpopular view that it is a much more future-proof and natural solution for many more use-cases than it gets credit for. I'd love to see a successor that cuts out some of the warts as much as the next person, but every solution has pros/cons, and XML is a pretty good balance in a lot of cases where people refuse to look at it.