Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
> On Tue, 2010-12-07 at 20:25 -0500, Kurt Cagle wrote: >> That's one of the central problems with any solution of getting XML on >> the browser For me "getting XML on the browser" isn't the goal.. it's making XML easier to work with for the average dev - the reading and writing of config files, generating the intermediate formats etc. The typical problems that I see that frustrate people to point of hating XML are just because they've treated it as a string - encoding issues, broken namespaces, lone amperstands and left angle brackets etc. What appears to be a simple change to the file (say using a regex) breaks it completely, and for encoding issues this can be a real pain to track down. I've spent so much time telling people "you can't treat xml as a string" and then tried to explain some ways to do the update... people lose interest quickly when faced with SAX (try teaching SAX to someone to make a small change to a config file!), then get confused later when I mention Saxon, they really don't want to learn a new language like XSLT or XQuery, then there's JDOM or XOM or DOM... all options, all come with yet more libraries to add to the project. Perhaps I'm missing the golden simple way and a helpful teaching manner, but I can see the will to live draining from their eyes as I talk XMLFilterImpl and buffering the Characters... The 'next xml' needs to be treatable as a string... JSON is just a string, right? -- Andrew Welch http://andrewjwelch.com
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] |
