• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: ConciseXML syntax
• From: "Thomas B. Passin" <tpassin@c...>
• Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 13:21:28 -0500
• References: <004101c2be4b$762d4c60$6aa8a8c0@c...>

[Mike Plusch]
> 4. Attributes keys and attribute values can be any object,
>     not just strings.
> ConciseXML:
> <person name="Mike" age=28 married=true birth=<date 1968 1 10/> />
> XML 1.0:
> <person>
>  <field key="name">"Mike"</field>
>  <field key="age">28</field>
>  <field key="married">true</field>
>  <field key="birth">
>     <date><field key="year">1968</field>
>                <field key="month">1</field>
>                <field key="day">10</field>
>     </date>
>  </field>
> </person>

That is a ridiculous comparison.  Better:

XML 1.0:
<person name="Mike" age="28" married="true" birth="1968 1 10"/>

In the ConciseXML version of the date attribute, the data is a string that
has to be parsed, and you could just as well do the same in a reasonable XML
version.  There is no use in contriving stupid XML examples to make the
comparison more favorable to ConciseXML.

Cheers,

Tom P

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: ConciseXML syntax
    • From: Alaric Snell <alaric@a...>

• References:
  • ConciseXML syntax
    • From: "Mike Plusch" <mplusch@c...>

• Prev by Date: RE: Facts to Support RAND? was: Re: more pate nt fun
• Next by Date: Re: Facts to Support RAND? was: Re: more pate nt fun
• Previous by thread: Re: ConciseXML syntax
• Next by thread: Re: ConciseXML syntax
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread