On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 12:04:10 -0600, "A.M. Kuchling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 18:30:47 +0100, > rm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Nowadays, people are trying to create binary XML, XML databases, >> graphics in XML (btw, I'm quite impressed by SVG), you have XSLT, you >> have XSL-FO, ... . > >Which is an argument in favor of XML -- it's where the activity is, so it's >quite likely you'll encounter the need to know XML. Few projects use YAML, >so the chance of having to know its syntactic details is small. > <rant> I thought XML was a good idea, but IMO requiring quotes around even integer attribute values was an unfortunate decision. I don't buy their rationale of keeping parsing simple -- as if extracting a string with no embedded space from between an equal sign and terminating white space were that much harder than extracting the same delimited by double quotes. The result is cluttering SVG with needless cruft around numerical graphics parameters. </rant> OTOH, I think the HTML XML spec is very readable, and nicely designed. At least the version 1.0 spec I snagged from W3C a long time ago. ... I see the third edition at http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml/ is differently styled, (I guess new style sheets) but still pretty readable (glancing at it now). Regards, Bengt Richter -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
