On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 4:31 PM, Bjartur Thorlacius <svartma...@gmail.com>wrote:
> On 4/8/10, Jacob Todd <jaketodd...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 07, 2010 at 06:22:49PM +0000, Bjartur Thorlacius wrote: > >> ... > >> P.S. I'm new here. Why's XML so evil? If you don't have to test for > >> well-formed and validness, that is. > > http://harmful.cat-v.org/software/xml/ > We can all agree that XML is insane as a interchange format between > databases. But for basic markup, when markdown/(re)StructuredText > sn't a fit, it allows one to use a (hopefully simple) generic parser. > Sexp(r)s are bloated with type info, and have a name which can get > them confused with structured-expressions. XML is (ugh) > SGML-compatible and quite readable if used sparsily, and only used to > add semantic info to content in another language such as English or > SPARC-assembly. Some Tcl-based syntax would maybe suck less, but is it > worth it to get rid of XML-style closing tags? > > title lolcats > author Thorlacius Bjartur > author Friend Imaginary > para { > This is a slightly better alternative to XML. > } > para "XML at least doesn't require quotes: > [ http://w3.org/TR/xml ]" > para [ /bin/games/fortune ] > # URIs enclosed in []s get replaced by the resource. > > S-expr (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-expression) would be even better. But this has been said sooo many times...
