• From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
• To: xml-dev@l...
• Date: Sun, 28 May 2023 08:51:44 -0400

(3) the generated XML is easy to understand.

This decision is not the sponsor's to take, especially if they are not familiar with XML. The generated (I prefer the word "captured") XML must be easy to PROCESS; its comprehensibility by unaided and inexpert humans is of secondary importance. It is often hard to convince funding agents of this.

I have to disagree. Some of the worst and most ubiquitous XML formats out there - pretty much anything Apple's done and the generally hideous OfficeXML - focused on processing, fitting with programmer expectations, and working with existing obscure object model foundations.  Hiding them behind tools has only made this worse.

Processing is important, yes, but we absolutely need to value human comprehensibility to stay out of various flaming dungheaps.  (The same issues apply to URIs and a wide variety of other things that computers use and humans regularly encounter.)

Thanks,
Simon St.Laurent

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Editor that is easy to use, generates XML under thehood, and supports tables?
    • From: Peter Flynn <peter@s...>

• References:
  • Editor that is easy to use, generates XML under the hood, andsupports tables?
    • From: Roger L Costello <costello@m...>
  • Re: Editor that is easy to use, generates XML under thehood, and supports tables?
    • From: Peter Flynn <peter@s...>