=?UTF-8?Q?Re:_[xml-dev]_The_Goals_of_XML_at_25,_and_the_one_thing_that_X

["Gavin Nicol" <gtn@rbii.com>]

I'm not sure that pom.xml is a good use of XML... but at the end of the day, maybe groovy isn't either!

IMHO the biggest mistake is thinking that any *one* syntax will solve for every use case. Markdown is great for simple documents, but pretty horrible for complex documents. JSON is great for ad-hoc interchange, not so great for RPC or documents. XML is pretty good as a document archival/interchange format, not so great for RPC/data interchange (unless it's text heavy). S-expressions are nice for exchanging little expressions (vs JSON AST serializations/query languages), etc. etc.

The one thing I do see a lot of is trying to jam a round peg into  square hole, or a square peg into a round hole based on dogma: there are some really monstrous JSON uses out there (and I've been guilty of a few). The sad fact is that a lot of technology adoption is driven by popularity contests, not informed decisions.

One thing I find amusing is that some modern browser frameworks are kind of reinventing generic markup, and in a very convoluted way. That's why I do wonder about XML in the browser... maybe a subset as Rick suggests, maybe not, but there are a lot of use-cases that could still be met (and yes, I am familiar with XAML, XUL et al). 

On Tue, Jul 20, 2021, at 3:42 AM, Mukul Gandhi wrote:

I think that, some people within this thread, have expressed concern that usage of XML is reducing.

An example came to my mind. I'm sure, most of us and others as well, have used the Java build framework Maven which is hugely popular. Maven's build configuration is mentioned in the file pom.xml. I therefore imply that, Maven uses XML as a primary means to manage Java builds.

I'm sure, there would be many other examples of good XML use.

On Sun, Jul 18, 2021 at 2:07 PM Rick Jelliffe <rjelliffe@allette.com.au> wrote:

... 

--

Regards,

Mukul Gandhi