Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
I find that often to me and my clients, you are either (a) not going to touch XML directly because you are using a user interface, which you would have used anyway even if XML were not present or (b) you're a programmer and prefer to monkey around with the code directly anyway. In the case of (b), no amount of pretty printing will turn C++ into Python or Ruby, and no amount of pretty printing will clarify the semantics of an obfuscated schema. Jeff Lowery wrote: >>Paul Jensen wrote: >> >>>It's a good point -- a standard syntax does have advantages you >>>mention. I just find that XML is cumbersome to enter, and often >>>difficult to read. > > > If it's just a question of format, HTML Tidy is useful for plain ol' vanilla > XML: > > http://tidy.sourceforge.net/ > > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an > initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org> > > The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/ > > To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription > manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl> > >
|
