Re: [xml-dev] Towards XML 2.0

[Stephen Green <stephengreenubl@gmail.com>]

>
> The typical problems that I see that frustrate people to point of
> hating XML are just because they've treated it as a string - encoding
> issues, broken namespaces, lone amperstands and left angle brackets
> etc.  What appears to be a simple change to the file (say using a
> regex) breaks it completely, and for encoding issues this can be a
> real pain to track down.
>

This description pretty well matches the kinds of gripes I've heard too.
Is the idea of a simple XML profile or even more simplification than that
actually going to improve things for these people, I wonder. Which of
the problems people experience will be solved this way or is something
else needed?

> The 'next xml' needs to be treatable as a string... JSON is just a
> string, right?
>

Many people think XML is like that already, which may be much of the
problem. Will letting XML be treated more like a string solve the main
problems of
"encoding issues, broken namespaces, lone amperstands and left angle brackets
etc"?

Best regards

Steve
---
Stephen D Green




On 8 December 2010 10:03, Andrew Welch <andrew.j.welch@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 2010-12-07 at 20:25 -0500, Kurt Cagle wrote:
>>> That's one of the central problems with any solution of getting XML on
>>> the browser
>
> For me "getting XML on the browser" isn't the goal.. it's making XML
> easier to work with for the average dev - the reading and writing of
> config files, generating the intermediate formats etc.
>
> The typical problems that I see that frustrate people to point of
> hating XML are just because they've treated it as a string - encoding
> issues, broken namespaces, lone amperstands and left angle brackets
> etc.  What appears to be a simple change to the file (say using a
> regex) breaks it completely, and for encoding issues this can be a
> real pain to track down.
>
> I've spent so much time telling people "you can't treat xml as a
> string" and then tried to explain some ways to do the update... people
> lose interest quickly when faced with SAX (try teaching SAX to someone
> to make a small change to a config file!), then get confused later
> when I mention Saxon, they really don't want to learn a new language
> like XSLT or XQuery, then there's JDOM or XOM or DOM... all options,
> all come with yet more libraries to add to the project.
>
> Perhaps I'm missing the golden simple way and a helpful teaching
> manner, but I can see the will to live draining from their eyes as I
> talk XMLFilterImpl and buffering the Characters...
>
> The 'next xml' needs to be treatable as a string... JSON is just a
> string, right?
>
>
> --
> Andrew Welch
> http://andrewjwelch.com
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
>
> XML-DEV is a publicly archived, unmoderated list hosted by OASIS
> to support XML implementation and development. To minimize
> spam in the archives, you must subscribe before posting.
>
> [Un]Subscribe/change address: http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/
> Or unsubscribe: xml-dev-unsubscribe@lists.xml.org
> subscribe: xml-dev-subscribe@lists.xml.org
> List archive: http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
> List Guidelines: http://www.oasis-open.org/maillists/guidelines.php
>
>