[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
consider as a problem Java vs XML. Java scripts disrupt most
windows opearating systems when the internet browser is configured not to
run scripts or java scripts.
Many people will not allow java to run on internet explorer
windows op installed intel machines.
for this reason alone, xml gets my vote.
sterling
On Thu, 3 Feb 2005, Bill de hÓra wrote:
> David Lyon wrote:
> > Liam,
> >
> > I was reading this article...
> >
> > http://www.advogato.org/article/820.html
> >
> > so everything is looking good for an xml 2.0... with datatyping
> > and other good stuff...
>
>
> "So I'm with Jim Gettys here, let's drain the swamp. XML might not be
> perfect for this, but it's better than today's nonsensical mess."
>
> With regard to Liam's observation on configuration above. The Java world
> has made heavy use of XML configuration and represents to my knowledge
> the best available data point for any effort in that direction.
>
> Although using XML is a handy way to get configuration /into/ Java
> systems (once you bind to a tool like Digester or XStream), it's not
> clear how beneficial that has been in draining swamps with regard to the
> formats themselves. There are a *lot* of XML config formats out there.
> In a Java project, dealing with a dozen different formats is typical.
> Maintaining systems using scads of XML deployment descriptors and config
> files is a pita, especially in a cluster. The current situation is known
> to be a mess - it's not at all clear that XML is helping.
>
> XML alone arguably offers too much flexibility for a configuration
> language; what's needed are further constraints in the way Ant
> constrains task coordination or RDF constrains relationships. Do check
> out smartfrog [1] for an alternative approach to this problem (btw, one
> of the people involved in smartfrog, Steve Loughran, is also a committer
> to Ant).
>
>
> Utter Speculation: I think one of the issues people have reading markup
> for configuration is that XML structure drowns out the information,
> unless you go for heavily attribute driven markup, which XML people tend
> to frown on. XML seems to be clearer when things are the size of
> paragraphs rather than sentences. Given XML's roots maybe that's not
> altogether surprising.
>
> cheers
> Bill
>
> [1] http://www.smartfrog.org/
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an
> initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>
>
> The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
> manager: <http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/index.php>
>
|
