On 17 Jan 2002, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
> YAML is very data-centric (fine for machine-to-machine communication,
> but a bit awkward for human to machine or even human to human),
> however, and indent sensitive (think "python").  I'd vote against
> moving from RFC822-header-style info files (at present) to YAML.  Ugh.

Well, I'm not sure what you're talking about, given that YAML is
specifically designed to be human-readable.

And as for indent-sensitivity and moving from the current RFC822-header
style: In the fairly simple case that Fink's info files would fall
under, it would look very much like a RFC822-header, with probably
no more than one, maybe two, levels of indentation. (*)  As such, the
transition from the current style would be fairly minimal, compared
to XML.  This is a sizable plus.

So why move from the current format to YAML at all then?  Because it
provides flexibility -- various styles of handling multi-line text,
escaping binary and unicode, arbitrary nesting (probably the most
important), built-in framework for stream-based parsing, etc. --
that the current format does not, AFAICT.  Except for the multi-line
functionality, all stuff you get by using XML, except you don't need
to add anywhere near as much markup as XML.

I realize it's not the popular suggestion, but give it a decent look
before dismissing it.

(*) As a perl devotee, I understand your revulsion to forced use of
indentation, Randall.  I'm of the same mind... but only with respect
to soruce code.  This is not source code though, but rather essentially
a config file, and use of whitespace to indicate nesting makes far more
sense in that circumstance, IMHO.


_______________________________________________
Fink-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel

Reply via email to