Next time I will do any more serious XML, I will most definetely look into XML::Twig - it seems to be very easy and simple to do things with too, with the added benefit of making it possible to "stream" your XML through it without the memory footprint. I've seen lots of great programmers here use that module, and without having actually used it myself - yet - I am very impressed.
In the recent thread XML Search and Replace there are quite a few examples on different modules being used to manipulate XML.
I don't think that is a typo. You can use XML::Simple to emit HTML, as long as you conform to XML rules, as XHTML does. It is just a warning that if you are trying to emit HTML, you can't/shouldn't do it HTML 4.0 (and down) style, but rather XHTML, which means, among other things, that all attributes must have a value. Just saying checked isn't enough in a checkbox, for instance, you must say checked="checked" or some such to be conformant. Which means, that an attribute, say as a hash key, is not a good idea to define as checked => '' (or undef), but should be checked => 'checked'. Hope that makes some sense. :)
Update: See jeffa's response below, and don't take this as a recommendation to use XMLout() to generate HTML, only a clarification to what it meant. :)
In reply to Re: Which XML module to use?
by Dog and Pony
in thread Which XML module to use?
by BrowserUk
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |