Lists Home |
Date Index |
Bob Wyman wrote:
> But frankly, I think while it would be nice if XML were more
> compact, it will do more harm then good to have two flavors of XML in
> the wild. I recognize that you've probably put a lot of good, hard
> work into defining your syntax and making the code work, however, I'm
> afraid that if it becomes popular, the impact on interop is not going
> to be pleasant. If we're going to have a common alternative to XML,
> then it should offer *great* advantages over XML -- advantages that
> are greater than those that seem to derive from your proposal.
I never thought of my indented compact syntax as anything but a quick
and easy device to make some xml files fast and easy to type (for _me_!
- and perhaps someone else too). And that is mostly the case, I think,
when the xml is fairly list-like. In fact, this format grew out of my
efforts to let a non-xml person type simple indented lists, and have me
turn them into xml.
I normally just type my xml into a text editor, but once in a while I
still fire up the indented parser. Of course, you could have it output