Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
On Thursday 03 February 2005 05:45 pm, you wrote: > i know it's way too late, but here's the thing i dislike most about xml: > overloading the < symbol. > > until 10 years ago this was a "less than" sign and had a partner, the > "greater than" sign. and it was used that way for about a century and a > half. and < is for me, one of the unreadables of xml. x < y => x < > y ??????? I can see your point. I guess they chose the less and greater than characters because they look a bit smoother on the screen and make for a bit easier reading. There is definitely an artistic element in xml and those <tags> do make for easier reading than [this]. > however i do like the specific start/end tag stuff and don't want to > lose it. I agree. I've never been in favour of draining the swamp and using it for a parking lot.. Installing some walkways, some signs, and a free barbeques and free parking is the way I like it. > i chose square brackets for my own markup language - [] - which predates > xml by about 15 years for exactly this reason. That's what you get for being too advanced for your time.. wasn't that the old windows 1.x .ini format? [Global Truths] worlds_most_dangerous_place=michael_jacksons_ranch iraq_is_less_dangerous=true time_to_feel_good_again=yes David -- Computergrid : The ones with the most connections win.
|
