On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 6:21 PM, daniela florescu <[email protected]> wrote: > > > What are they. Alot of the ones I have read aren't true and seem to be > based on a lack of knowledge about XML > > > I think I KNOW something about XML — not that I enjoyed learning it, but I > HAD to :-) > > Want a quick list ? processing instructions, weirdo parsing rules that are > inherited from the 1950’s SGML, weirdo design > of namespaces, XML Schema anyone !? nillable anyone !? Some early design > of Xpath 1.0 (no reserved keywords, semantics of =) > I’ll stop here. > > Only those and that would stop me (as a database person) right there to > use XML as a format for data. > > But you can pretty much model the semantic equivalent of JSON data without having to use a Schema, namespace, PI or any traverse any other of these treacherous terrains. Call it XML the Good Parts (Hmmmm where did I get that idea from). JSON is a very expensive over-reaction. There was no need to invent another format and then make in non-interoperable with XML.
_______________________________________________ [email protected] http://x-query.com/mailman/listinfo/talk
