The issue of the readability of XML is real, but it's at least a one-time investment to get good at reading it. How many YAML-like solutions are out there in different circles, with library support in one language and not another? JSON, specifically, is nice because it's another standardized (ECMAScript) language with broad support. IME, XML is pretty easy to make one-time edits against in a text editor, just as people claim for YAML.

Now, in a large organization where a standard configuration language among many programs needs to be more lay-person readable than XML, there's definitely something to be said for teaching a bunch of people YAML or something similar. I'm still inclined to say that programmers or data specialists are more likely to want to leverage what they know in XML or in the implementation language than to learn a new, less standard data interchange format.

Not specifically to bring yet another format into the discussion, but I don't see any benefits of YAML I wouldn't get with LDIF, which can be directly imported into most LDAP implementations. If you're wanting to share a common config format among an organization, LDAP and LDIF seem ideally suited. Since that's the best scenario I can think of for YAML, I'm again at a loss to see the need.

Having options is nice, so it's probably good that there is a YAML for it to be another option. It's easy to have too many options to be able to evaluate them all fully, though, and to have too many different options chosen within different parts of an organization. If one is going to choose a standard, it's often smart to choose one which can leverage existing knowledge and existing tools. XML, LDAP (with LDIF), JSON, etc. seem to fit this bill better than YAML.

Now, there's two separate arguments here. One is whether YAML is good enough and offers important enough advantages to be a widely accepted and supported standard. The other is whether or not it already is a widely accepted and supported standard. If the former argument passes muster, then some supporters of YAML need to work on satisfying the latter. Until both are satisfied, either argument by itself is going to be answered with 'Yeah, but...' and "So what?' types of comments.

In reply to Re^9: An Idiot's Guide to YAML by mr_mischief
in thread An Idiot's Guide to YAML by scorpio17

Title:
Use:  <p> text here (a paragraph) </p>
and:  <code> code here </code>
to format your post, it's "PerlMonks-approved HTML":


  • Posts are HTML formatted. Put <p> </p> tags around your paragraphs. Put <code> </code> tags around your code and data!
  • Titles consisting of a single word are discouraged, and in most cases are disallowed outright.
  • Read Where should I post X? if you're not absolutely sure you're posting in the right place.
  • Please read these before you post! —
  • Posts may use any of the Perl Monks Approved HTML tags:
    a, abbr, b, big, blockquote, br, caption, center, col, colgroup, dd, del, details, div, dl, dt, em, font, h1, h2, h3, h4, h5, h6, hr, i, ins, li, ol, p, pre, readmore, small, span, spoiler, strike, strong, sub, summary, sup, table, tbody, td, tfoot, th, thead, tr, tt, u, ul, wbr
  • You may need to use entities for some characters, as follows. (Exception: Within code tags, you can put the characters literally.)
            For:     Use:
    & &amp;
    < &lt;
    > &gt;
    [ &#91;
    ] &#93;
  • Link using PerlMonks shortcuts! What shortcuts can I use for linking?
  • See Writeup Formatting Tips and other pages linked from there for more info.