- Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2018 21:34:39 +0200
- From: deloptes <deloptes@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: utf
> On Thu, Apr 05, 2018 at 02:56:47PM +0200, Nicolas George wrote:
>> tomas@xxxxxxxxxx (2018-04-05):
>> > But then when I see people proposing XML as structured data
>> > representation, I suddenly grow very sad...
>> Isn't it?
> For the last 6 years I've seen it done a lot, and yes, I speak
> of painful experience.
> XML is a baroque, but passable document serialization language.
> But (mis-)using it as a data serialization language must be one
> of the worst (and ugliest) misunderstandings IT has had the last
> 20 years.
Don't know about your experience - in the past 10+y I worked a lot with XML.
It might be not suitable for the specific case (I am not sure I understood
correctly what OPs goal is), but XML does not care what kind of data you
will embed as far as it is typed and as a machine exchange language it is
exactly what it is intended to be.
In terms of serialization it also depends - but the point was to split text
and process it.