Re: XML tools for Octave

[John W. Eaton]

On 29-Jun-2006, Andy Adler wrote:

| My best quote about what's good about XML is (from slashdot):
| 
|    You just gave the best argument for adopting XML as widely as possible.
|    Yes, all these can be parsed [...] but they all require *different*
|    code for each config file. If they were in XML you'd still need different
|    semantic code, of course, but a whole wodge of syntax issues
|    [...] would be dealt with.  But they would be dealt with *once*.

Yes, it is better to have one format than many when parsing files, but
just because XML is widely used doesn't make it a good format.

|    - it was invented to markup text, not data. This forced lots of syntactic
|      choices that do not map to programming languages
| 
|    - XML looks easy, but has many subleties. Thus many people write hand
|      parsers that mostly, not completely, work.
| 
|    - Most raw parser API's (DOM, SAX) suck. I mean that they are way to
|      complicated and too low level.
| 
|    - Many XML based Standards are bloated and buggy. For example SOAP, the
|      XML standard for RPI in .NET *requires* invalid XML.

So the only good thing about it is that it is widely used?

Stop the insanity!  :-/

jwe