in reply to Perl/XML/MySQL

Many SQL engines (and perl modules) are more than happy to export the tables to XML. Why? Because you can then move them somewhere else (on a disk, perhaps) to another machine, where it may be accepted happily by another dbengine (not necessarily even an SQL or the same dbengine) and still retain full use of the data (with some minor tweaking). But if, you're not doing anything like this than using XML for anything db-related is superfluous. In general speed(dbegine)>speed(DB_File)>speed(XML file) since XML is a plain text format. It will be easier and faster to extract than interpreting an XML file. But XML has other uses....but since you don't ask....

I'll answer anyway. XML was once considered a replacement for HTML- but that didn't pan out. XML makes a great human-readable config file format as well as a nice cross-platform format in general, which makes it useful in many situations...

AgentM Systems nor Nasca Enterprises nor Bone::Easy nor Macperl is responsible for the comments made by AgentM. Remember, you can build any logical system with NOR.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
RE: Re: Perl/XML/MySQL
by merlyn (Sage) on Nov 12, 2000 at 17:04 UTC
    XML was once considered a replacement for HTML- but that didn't pan out.
    Both halves of that statement are provably wrong.

    XML is the replacement for SGML. And XHTML (the XML-ized version of the SGML-based HTML standard) is the new standard for Web browsers, says the W3, of whom Netscape (now AOL) and Microsoft are big members and players.

    Today's tip: People will trust the rest of your answers better when you stop making stuff up when you post.

    -- Randal L. Schwartz, Perl hacker

[reply]

      Well, actually both statements are probably (and may be even provably ;--) true.

      XML was developed by people from the SGML world as a way to capitalize on HTML's success and to re-marked SGML in a more "you-can-do-it-too" way.

      So for SGML people (of which I didn't know you were one merlyn!) XML is the replacement for SGML, but it was really proposed and pushed as a replacement for HTML. And it is still widely perceived as "the future of HTML".

      As I saw it once XML is "HTML on steroids", and conversely it is "SGML on Prozac".

      The bottom line is that XML is whatever you want it to be, and I don't think beating up on people who see it from the HTML angle is a good way to promote it.

[reply]
[reply]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom