[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
[Dare Obasanjo]
]
>"3. XML is text, but isn't meant to be read. Programs that produce
spreadsheets, address books,
>and other structured data often store that data on disk, using either a
binary or text format. One
>advantage of a text format is that it allows people, if necessary, to
look at the data without
>the program that produced it; in a pinch, you can read a text format with
your favorite text editor..."
Quoting from your quote:
>"One advantage of a text format is that it allows people, if necessary,
to look at the data without
>the program that produced it; in a pinch, you can read a text format with
your favorite text editor..."
You only get human readability if you design for it. With enough namespaces
and empty elements
and voodoo #PCDATA and serialized-object-think, XML can be made solely
machine readable.
Although this is a legitimate use of XML, it is not what the marketing
department tends to imply when
they effuse that "all the data/config files are in XML". Developers buy
that line, then look at the files
and go "ugh!". I don't blame them.
BTW, I heartily recommend this essay by Paul Graham - Hackers and Painters
(http://www.paulgraham.com/hp.html). (Via Tim Bray
http://tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2003/05/05/Languages)
Much of what he says about readability of programs is equally applicable to
readability of data.
You need to have empathy with your readers as well as your users. That is
the essence of good coding and, I would
argue the essence of good XML.
regards,
Sean
http://seanmcgrath.blogspot.com
|
