• From: Thomas Passin <list1@t...>
• To: xml-dev@l...
• Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2017 10:27:42 -0500

This is a good illustration of my dictum

"Start simple because it's only going to get more complex".

TomP

On 2/16/2017 10:05 AM, Simon St.Laurent wrote:

XML still works beautifully, if you apply it to the experience from
which it emerged: documents.  It works far better if you can forget the
weight loaded onto it by a decade and a half of developers trying to
make it fit a space it was never going to handle gracefully.  XML can
work for some lightweight data storage and messaging, but somehow that
rarely stays "light".

• References:
  • What are the practical, negative consequences of thinking thatattributes are metadata?
    • From: "Costello, Roger L." <costello@m...>
  • Re: What are the practical, negative consequences ofthinking that attributes are metadata?
    • From: Mukul Gandhi <gandhi.mukul@g...>
  • Re: What are the practical, negative consequences ofthinking that attributes are metadata?
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
  • RE: What are the practical, negative consequences ofthinking that attributes are metadata?
    • From: "Costello, Roger L." <costello@m...>
  • Re: What are the practical, negative consequences ofthinking that attributes are metadata?
    • From: Rick Jelliffe <rjelliffe@a...>
  • Re: What are the practical, negative consequences of thinkingthat attributes are metadata?
    • From: Thomas Passin <list1@t...>
  • Re: What are the practical, negative consequences ofthinking that attributes are metadata?
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>