Dave Cross wrote:
> Was it the excitment of finishing the book that finally sent
> you completely over the edge?
No, I'm fine thanks. But I think my alter ego has got a few problems. :-)
A
From: Andy Wardley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 8/28/03 8:07:46 AM
> The lifeform previously known as "Andy" has been replaced
> by a virtually intelligent entity called "&winky;",
> implemented in a dick-shaped chunk of LeonOrange MemoryGel
> [tm].
>
> But that is a mere implementation detail.
Michel Rodriguez wrote:
> I actually enjoyed this thread.
Me too. It has been the most valuable discussion about XML I've had in
ages. It prompted me to go and find out more about RelaxNG (ThankYou,
ThankYou), RDF::Schema, and various other XML bits that I really should
have kept more up-to-dat
Nicholas Clark wrote:
> I smell a conspiracy. :-)
Sorry, that's my dick again.
I'll get my coat.
A
On Wed, Aug 27, 2003 at 11:03:24PM +0100, Nicholas Clark wrote:
> let alone be in London. Although for the sake of public sanity it helps
> not to feed the trolls.
There're trolls? :-)
Apologies for my earlier post, I seem to be in a particularly venomous mood.
It wasn't actually intended to be a
Nicholas Clark wrote:
On Wed, Aug 27, 2003 at 09:40:54PM +0200, Robin Berjon wrote:
Come on Michel, you know that I have special powers to make you join *any* thread :)
How come you argue about it here, but not on paris.pm?
I smell a conspiracy. :-)
No, we're still teaching Michel how to use fo
On Wed, Aug 27, 2003 at 11:56:59PM +0200, Michel Rodriguez wrote:
> I am afraid we can argue anywhere, especially in places where we shouldn't
> be in the first place.
"shouldn't be" ? Eh. What's this "should not" business?
London.pm welcomes anyone. You don't even have to like perl to be a membe
On Wed, 27 Aug 2003, Nicholas Clark wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 27, 2003 at 09:40:54PM +0200, Robin Berjon wrote:
> > Come on Michel, you know that I have special powers to make you join *any* thread
> > :)
>
> How come you argue about it here, but not on paris.pm?
> I smell a conspiracy. :-)
I am afra
On Wed, Aug 27, 2003 at 09:40:54PM +0200, Robin Berjon wrote:
> Come on Michel, you know that I have special powers to make you join *any* thread :)
How come you argue about it here, but not on paris.pm?
I smell a conspiracy. :-)
Mmm. Meanwhile, where are the Esperanto translations? dahut.pm stil
Michel Rodriguez wrote:
On Wed, 27 Aug 2003, Robin Berjon wrote:
Yes! Except here it'll be done in a separate space to avoid
complexity-pollution, and we are sworn to use only sensible names and to call a
Name a Name, and never a GI.
You mean a NamespaceURI + a Name don't you? Wasn't it you who sa
On Wed, 27 Aug 2003, Robin Berjon wrote:
> Michel Rodriguez wrote:
> > Oh! You mean re-inventing for XML the markup minimization features that
> > made SGML "too complex"?
>
> Yes! Except here it'll be done in a separate space to avoid
> complexity-pollution, and we are sworn to use only sensibl
Michel Rodriguez wrote:
On Wed, 27 Aug 2003, Robin Berjon wrote:
There is no doubt at all that gzip, bzip, and friends are the best at
compressing any random bitstream. But, when it comes to compressing XML, it's
more than possible to do better (and of course has been done). Given a grammar
(ie a s
On Wed, 27 Aug 2003, Robin Berjon wrote:
> There is no doubt at all that gzip, bzip, and friends are the best at
> compressing any random bitstream. But, when it comes to compressing XML, it's
> more than possible to do better (and of course has been done). Given a grammar
> (ie a schema) you can
Ben wrote:
This would be essentially a form of chunked parsed encoding, no? The idea being
that an app continues to chuck around its data structures in (some possibly
trivially transformed version of) the wire format? So that an 'XML editor' really does
mean that (in some sense) the data is repr
Michael Stevens wrote:
Sun have an article on something they seem to call "Fast Web Services",
which appears to be keeping standard web services APIs, but putting
the data in an efficient binary format on the wire at
http://developer.java.sun.com/developer/technicalArticles/WebServices/fastWS/index
On Wed, Aug 27, 2003 at 02:16:32PM +0200, Robin Berjon wrote:
> Ben wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 27, 2003 at 12:52:48PM +0200, Robin Berjon wrote:
> >>[0]http://www.w3.org/2003/07/binary-xml-cfp.html
> >
> > Pardon me for being thick here, but what possible gains are there for this
> > in general-purpos
Dominic Mitchell wrote:
An ASN.1 neural implant? ;-)
Yuck.
--
Robin Berjon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Research Engineer, Expwayhttp://expway.fr/
7FC0 6F5F D864 EFB8 08CE 8E74 58E6 D5DB 4889 2488
Ben wrote:
On Wed, Aug 27, 2003 at 12:52:48PM +0200, Robin Berjon wrote:
Yes, I'm aware of the issue, which is probably why I ended up on the program
committee of this[0] Thing With A Horrible Name :)
[0]http://www.w3.org/2003/07/binary-xml-cfp.html
Pardon me for being thick here, but what possib
Ben <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> IME the parsing of a non-trivial binary format is a much nastier task than
> parsing text, especially structured text like XML.
>
> Vendors are generally pretty shit at providing even a decent interoperable
> *text*-based protocol (viz variously and gloriously br
On Wed, Aug 27, 2003 at 12:52:48PM +0200, Robin Berjon wrote:
> Nigel Hamilton wrote:
> > For example, a bank I previously worked at has trashed a lot of its SOAP
> > transaction system because it was too slow. The reason? The byte size of
> > the XML wrappers dwarfed the actual payload of data.
>
Nigel Hamilton wrote:
As for file truncation, having to wait for the last XML tag to arrive can
be a showstopper too.
On which planet do you have to do that?
Planets where your module needs to build the whole XML tree in RAM (if it
fits) before you can start processing it - XML::Simple, XML::TreeBu
> > As for file truncation, having to wait for the last XML tag to arrive can
> > be a showstopper too.
>
> On which planet do you have to do that?
>
Planets where your module needs to build the whole XML tree in RAM (if it
fits) before you can start processing it - XML::Simple, XML::TreeBuilder
Dominic Mitchell wrote:
Andy Wardley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
One of these days I'll get around to writing the generic schema
representation tool that I've been thinking about since then.
Something that works independantly of any particular data representation
method like XML.
If you confine y
Andy Wardley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> One of these days I'll get around to writing the generic schema
> representation tool that I've been thinking about since then.
> Something that works independantly of any particular data representation
> method like XML.
If you confine yourself to XML,
Simon Wistow wrote:
On Wed, Aug 27, 2003 at 11:19:07AM +0200, Robin Berjon said:
I wouldn't want to write SVG, or XHTML, or XilBook into a Storable
file.
Presumably SVG into an optimised Storable file would become, if
optimised, SWF. Which is a doddle to parse.
Doubtful. The rendering of an SVG an
On Wed, Aug 27, 2003 at 11:19:07AM +0200, Robin Berjon said:
> I wouldn't want to write SVG, or XHTML, or XilBook into a Storable
> file.
Presumably SVG into an optimised Storable file would become, if
optimised, SWF. Which is a doddle to parse.
...
Oh, wait.
--
the illusion of knowledge wit
David Cantrell wrote:
It's only self-documenting if it's readable. As soon as you go beyond
the trivial, XML seems to become unreadable.
Just like Perl. Unless you make the effort to learn it. Oh, just like Perl.
And even with those stock parsers, I have to write so much supporting
code that it w
On Tue, Aug 26, 2003 at 08:01:02PM -0400, muppet wrote:
> about the only benefits i see are
> "self-documenting" data files
It's only self-documenting if it's readable. As soon as you go beyond
the trivial, XML seems to become unreadable.
>
> Now both my hands are up in the air. I'm typing this with my dick.
'winky', surely.
Assuming that you're 'that' Andy Wardley, obviously.
N
--
11 2 3 4 5 6 77
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Nigel Hamilton wrote:
Most tab-delimited files start with the first row defining the column
headings, so no problems there.
But the escaping problems are pretty much the same. And the absence of enforced
character encoding is a bloody nightmare. US-ASCII people rarely understand the
huge differen
On Tue, 2003-08-26 at 11:59, Andy Wardley wrote:
> Robin Berjon wrote:
> > Hands up who thinks XML Schema sucks?
>
> Now both my hands are up in the air. I'm typing this with my dick.
mental note: do not use andy's keyboard.
i bought the o'reilley book on xml so i could find out definitively wh
Mark Fowler wrote:
> Hang on, I seem to remember you giving this big talk about how you were
> going to use XML Schema to do all this whizz bang stuff.
>
> Whatever happened to that? Proved to be too complex?
It proved to be close to impossible to implement the full XML Schema
specification. My
>
> > Bring back tab-delimited! :-)
>
> Yes, because not knowing what your fields are labelled and what
> character set it's all in is really helpful. Not to mention not knowing
> about truncation of the file.
>
> Sorry for being flamish, I know that post was intended less seriously
> than I
Toby Corkindale wrote:
I've implemented the fix using XML::LibXML::XPathContext, which seems to do
the trick with it's registerNS function; it does tend to clutter things a bit
though. :(
It does clutter things a little bit, but it's the only right way to do it.
The other thing I don't understand
Andy Wardley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mark Fowler wrote:
>> http://www.w3.org/2001/vxml";
>> xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance";
>> xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.w3.org/2001/vxml
>> http://www.w3.org/TR/voicexml20/vxml.xsd"; version="2.0"
>> >
>
> Hands up who thinks XML
On Tue, Aug 26, 2003 at 03:12:06PM +0100, Mark Fowler wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Aug 2003, Robin Berjon wrote:
>
> > When you call findnodes, you are not providing the necessary namespace
> > context, which is why it works when you remove the namespace but not
> > when it's there.
Robin, Mark, many than
On Tue, Aug 26, 2003 at 11:06:37AM -0500, Nigel Hamilton wrote:
> > Mark Fowler wrote:
> > > http://www.w3.org/2001/vxml";
> > > xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance";
> > > xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.w3.org/2001/vxml
> > > http://www.w3.org/TR/voicexml20/vxml.xsd"; version="
Nigel Hamilton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Here! here!
>
> Just take the XML::Simple documentation, it starts off courageously simple
> but before you know it you're way past the synopsis and in a world of
> hurt.
>
> The escaping, unescaped, escape characters has been a nightmare, every
> XML
Mark Fowler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Aug 2003, Andy Wardley wrote:
>
>> Robin Berjon wrote:
>> > Hands up who thinks XML Schema sucks?
>>
>> Now both my hands are up in the air. I'm typing this with my dick.
>
> Hang on, I seem to remember you giving this big talk about how you we
Mark Fowler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Aug 2003, Robin Berjon wrote:
>
>> When you call findnodes, you are not providing the necessary namespace
>> context, which is why it works when you remove the namespace but not
>> when it's there.
>
> Allow me to rephrase to help make this pain
> Mark Fowler wrote:
> > http://www.w3.org/2001/vxml";
> > xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance";
> > xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.w3.org/2001/vxml
> > http://www.w3.org/TR/voicexml20/vxml.xsd"; version="2.0"
> > >
>
> Hands up who thinks XML sucks?
>
Here! here!
Just take
On Tue, 26 Aug 2003, Andy Wardley wrote:
> Robin Berjon wrote:
> > Hands up who thinks XML Schema sucks?
>
> Now both my hands are up in the air. I'm typing this with my dick.
Hang on, I seem to remember you giving this big talk about how you were
going to use XML Schema to do all this whizz ban
Robin Berjon wrote:
> Hands up who thinks XML Schema sucks?
Now both my hands are up in the air. I'm typing this with my dick.
A
Andy Wardley wrote:
Mark Fowler wrote:
http://www.w3.org/2001/vxml";
xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance";
xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.w3.org/2001/vxml
http://www.w3.org/TR/voicexml20/vxml.xsd"; version="2.0"
Hands up who thinks XML sucks?
Hmmm. Same start element:
Hands up
On Tue, Aug 26, 2003 at 04:11:15PM +0100, Andy Wardley wrote:
>Hands up who thinks XML sucks?
For many things, yes. Now that it's less of a buzzword than it was a
couple of years ago, people are doing more sensible things with it.
Stick it on the stack with all the other computery techniques that
On Tue, Aug 26, 2003 at 03:44:51PM +0200, Robin Berjon wrote:
> Toby Corkindale wrote:
> >
> >Am I doing something wrong here, or is XML::LibXML, or is the VoiceXML
> >standard?
>
> When you call findnodes, you are not providing the necessary namespace
> context, which is why it works when you re
Mark Fowler wrote:
> http://www.w3.org/2001/vxml";
> xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance";
> xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.w3.org/2001/vxml
> http://www.w3.org/TR/voicexml20/vxml.xsd"; version="2.0"
> >
Hands up who thinks XML sucks?
A
On Tue, 26 Aug 2003, Robin Berjon wrote:
> When you call findnodes, you are not providing the necessary namespace
> context, which is why it works when you remove the namespace but not
> when it's there.
Allow me to rephrase to help make this painfully clear:
The xmlns= means 'put everything not
Toby Corkindale wrote:
The problem is that although the XML document parses fine, and i can manually
trawl through child nodes OK, the findnodes() function doesn't work.
It *does* work if I remove the xmlns="" line from the
declaration. (I can leave the schema stuff in there)
Am I doing someth
I'm probably doing something stupid here, but I have the following problem:
I am trying to parse this simple XML:
http://www.w3.org/2001/vxml";
xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance";
xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.w3.org/2001/vxml
http://www.w3.org/TR/voicexml20/vxml.xsd"; v
50 matches
Mail list logo
