in reply to XML plus Perl -- simply magic

It's funny. There are 73 articles on Perl.com about Perl and XML. Not a single blip on Slashdot. The moment IBM realizes that Perl can handle XML, the world sits up and takes notice. Maybe it's because IBM realizes Perl is useful vs. Perl knowing how to handle XML?
My criteria for good software:
  1. Does it work?
  2. Can someone else come in, make a change, and be reasonably certain no bugs were introduced?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: XML plus Perl -- simply magic
by marto (Cardinal) on Feb 04, 2007 at 11:39 UTC
    I have no idea if Slashdot has linked to the Perl.com XML articles in the past, however IIRC Slashdot content is provided by user submissions. So I guess I am partly to blame, since I have never submitted any of the Perl.com XML articles :)

    I agree it is funny, that nobody else has done so in the past.

    Cheers

    Martin
[reply]
Re^2: XML plus Perl -- simply magic
by zentara (Cardinal) on Feb 04, 2007 at 13:16 UTC
[reply]
      *sighs* That's the wrong blasting. XML and YAML don't solve the same problem. XML solves the problem of how to encode arbitrary data + metadata into a text format. YAML solves the problem of how to encode arbitrarily-nested data structures. AFAIK, YAML doesn't address the issue of metadata.

      Now, YAML should be used in many places that XML is used. But, if you had to choose only one to use for every single arbitrary data (+metadata) need, that solution would be XML. I'd love to be proven wrong re: YAML's inability to handle arbitrary metadata, but I don't think I am.

      My criteria for good software:
      1. Does it work?
      2. Can someone else come in, make a change, and be reasonably certain no bugs were introduced?
[reply]

In Section Perl News