RE: RE: evolvable formats
10/11/2002 1:13:37 AM, "Dare Obasanjo" <dareo@m...> wrote: >I completely agree with Uche's sentiments. When I first saw the RSS >brouhaha and read many mentions the need for Ultra-liberal RSS >parsers I wondered why they bothered with XML and didn't just use >some other format instead. The only reason I can think of is buzzword >compliance. Yup. My perhaps overly-cryptic references to "RSS 3.0"  were intended to make the same point. I'm not sure how seriously anyone in the RSS world takes this, but compare  and  and ask yourself what REAL value XML adds in this particular scenario. I'm trying to remember my long-ago days in the newspaper software industry ... I remember the old newswire formats being an annoyance to parse, and as I understand it the "real" newswires were early adopters of XML. What about XML was so attractive? I'm guessing that it was mainly the "labelled data" aspect -- rather than using cryptic delimiters that implied (to a careful reader of the format spec) what was what, it just SAYS what is what... and of course the network effect one gets by being buzzword compliant (tools, tutorials, expertise, etc.). Does anyone (hi John Cowan!) have a better explanation?  http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/000574  http://www.intertwingly.net/blog/index.txt  http://www.intertwingly.net/blog/index.rss
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!
Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!
Download The World's Best XML IDE!
Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!
Subscribe in XML format