On 10/28/05, Joseph Flanigan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I did not mean to stir-up a discussion on Mach, I was using one
> aspect of Mach, XML, as something I think is wrong.

I must jump to Joseph's defense here. I think ColdFusion framework
developers became infatuated with XML a few years ago -- starting with
XML fusedocs -- and it's gotten out of hand.

I don't understand what was wrong with simpler text-based formats,
such as the java properties file and windows ini file. I thought that
a config file should only specify details; it should not implement
business logic. And I thought that's why config file formats tended to
be so constrained. The idea of an eXtensible format for config files
seems backwards to me.

If Joseph is an intelligent contributer who questions long-held
beliefs with sound arguments, I think he's an asset to the community.
If he's a troll, please don't feed him.

Patrick



--
Patrick McElhaney
704.560.9117
http://pmcelhaney.weblogs.us


----------------------------------------------------------
You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, send an email to 
[email protected] with the words 'unsubscribe cfcdev' as the subject of the 
email.

CFCDev is run by CFCZone (www.cfczone.org) and supported by CFXHosting 
(www.cfxhosting.com).

CFCDev is supported by New Atlanta, makers of BlueDragon
http://www.newatlanta.com/products/bluedragon/index.cfm

An archive of the CFCDev list is available at 
www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]


Reply via email to