From: Dee Earley on
On 07/06/2010 15:06, Mayayana wrote:
> |> I don't understand why so many people
> |> think that data isn't official until it's been
> |> packaged in XML.
> |
> | "Official" doesn't come into it.
> |
>
> Then why is someone trying to send names
> in XML via email why someone else tries to
> parse it at the other end? Doesn't that seem
> less than ideal to you?

Because it is an agreed upon format between the producer and the consumer.
As I said, there are many other formats that could have been picked, XML
is just an easy option.

> Opinions may vary about when/where/if XML
> is useful, but I think most people will agree
> that whatever else XML is, it's also an overdone
> fad, often being used in places where it's superfluous
> at best.

I see no reason not to use it.
I also support JSON output for places where it is easier to handle JSON.
For everything else, XML is perfectly fine.

> | It's more extensible, easier to parse, safe to parse through many
> | encoding formats, compresses well.
>
> More than...? Easier than...? In any particular
> context? ...That's my point. It's a tool, not a value
> judgement.

It's explicitly designed to be extensible, and obviously it won't be
more extensable than something else also designed to be, but by
definition, it WILL be more suitable than anything that wasn't designed
for it.

--
Dee Earley (dee.earley(a)icode.co.uk)
i-Catcher Development Team

iCode Systems

(Replies direct to my email address will be ignored.
Please reply to the group.)