[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
> 10/11/2002 1:13:37 AM, "Dare Obasanjo" <dareo@microsoft.com> wrote:
>
> >I completely agree with Uche's sentiments. When I first saw the RSS
> >brouhaha and read many mentions the need for Ultra-liberal RSS
> >parsers[0] I wondered why they bothered with XML and didn't just use
> >some other format instead. The only reason I can think of is buzzword
> >compliance.
>
> Yup. My perhaps overly-cryptic references to "RSS 3.0" [1] were intended
> to make the same point. I'm not sure how seriously anyone in
> the RSS world takes this, but compare [2] and [3] and ask yourself
> what REAL value XML adds in this particular scenario.
An argument that XML fails to "add value" can be made about *any format* by a
suitably determined opponent to XML. As I say, if I worried about such
opposition, I'd pack up and close up shop.
I believe that anyone who has written parsers for [1], and had to then deal
with the real world stresses on those parsers will have no problem
understanding what value [2] offers.
I've written a *lot* of parsers in my time: I don't need a lot of convincing
to favor XML formats for machine-processed formats.
--
Uche Ogbuji Fourthought, Inc.
http://uche.ogbuji.net http://4Suite.org http://fourthought.com
Python&XML column: 2. Introducing PyXML - http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2002/09/25/p
y.html
The Past, Present and Future of Web Services 1 - http://www.webservices.org/ind
ex.php/article/articleview/663/1/24/
The Past, Present and Future of Web Services 2 - 'http://www.webservices.org/in
dex.php/article/articleview/679/1/24/
Serenity through markup - http://adtmag.com/article.asp?id=6807
Tip: Using generators for XML processing - http://www-106.ibm.com/developerwork
s/xml/library/x-tipgenr.html
|
