Re: If XML is too hard for a programmer, perhaps he'd bebetter
Tim Bray wrote: > Dare Obasanjo wrote: >> The "Desperate Perl Hacker" argument was a bogus claim for XML 1.0 >> because of the existence of entities and CDATA sections but is quite >> farcical now with the existence of the Namespaces in XML >> recommendation (and it's bastard spawn "QNames in content"). > > Empirically false, at two levels. First, lots of people process XML > with perl (or equivalent) all the time. Second, the real requirement > was to make it tractable to take a large body of document data and make > quick programmatic changes on it. Indeed, the simple fact that people are doing SAX filtering in the archetypal Perl one-liners shows that the DPH argument has had its effect. There's work on making the situation even better, and the Perl 6 people are discussing very interesting things relating to XML. -- Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@e...> Research Engineer, Expway http://expway.fr/ 7FC0 6F5F D864 EFB8 08CE 8E74 58E6 D5DB 4889 2488
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