** Reply to message from Andrew Lentvorski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Wed, 09 Jul 2008 18:44:39 -0700
> So, Google has decided to "share" their "replacement" for XML: > http://www.betanews.com/article/Google_releases_its_data_encoding_format_to_compete_with_XML/1215530589 > http://google-opensource.blogspot.com/2008/07/protocol-buffers-googles-data.html > > Now, I'm no fan of XML. I loathe XML. XML is only "self-describing" in > the sense that I can read it by hand and generally puzzle out how to > write something to munge it. I've heard this over and over as if there is no good use for XML but let me throw out my $.001, use the tool which works for you. And having had to deal with passing data structures around with 3 or more other companies, XML makes maintaining the code far far easier because adding a data element to the structure for company X will not break company Y or Z software. They also don't require they get the changed data structures for anything other than updating docs. It's not the fastest, the best, or easiest but it fits some tasks. I also think that being pretty much language agnostic gets it used more too. And like a ton of other tools, when people get used to using a tool they will use it more and more. As far as Google's stuff goes, it doesn't sound too extreme to me to use and IDL to provide the descriptive element to faster data exchange structures. If that is what it is. -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-lpsg
