RE: ConciseXML arguments
Don't ignore the fact that people are telling you that it's not XML 1.0. If you haven't figured it out yet, the fact that it's not XML 1.0 is a huge problem for people on this list and, more generally, for developers everywhere working with XML. Drop the X and move on. XML is verbose. XML is not suitable for many applications. If it's not suitable for your application, don't use it. How hard is that to figure out? The verbosity of XML is a chief virtue and a chief vice of XML. Technologies are like that sometimes. People didn't invent XPATH, XQuery, string encodings, CSV data, etc. to avoid the verbosity of XML. Are you saying there is no way to represent key/value pairs in XML or too many ways to represent key/value pairs in XML? The first alternative is false and I don't see the problem with the second. To summarize, I'm not convinced that the two things you want to fix are really broken. -----Original Message----- From: Mike Plusch [mailto:mplusch@c...] Sent: Sunday, January 19, 2003 11:52 AM To: xml-dev Subject: ConciseXML arguments Out of the 50 email messages about ConciseXML, almost all of the comments have been of the sort: "but ConciseXML is not XML 1.0!". Although this is a true statement, how about any comments on the two key problems that ConciseXML fixes that are reoccuring issues across the industry. 1. XML 1.0 is verbose and is not suitable for many applications that people would like to use it for. People invent new syntax all the time to avoid XML 1.0. For example, XPATH, XQuery, string encodings, CSV data, etc. 2. There is not a single way in XML 1.0 to represent data fields that have a key and value where the key can be any type and the value can be any type.
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