Trying to follow this without being knowledgable is kinda fun, like being
a kid at the dinner table.

On Wed, March 14, 2007 11:39 pm, Andrew Lentvorski wrote:
> Bob La Quey wrote:
>> PS. My main argument, rarely articulated was that "all of the
>> crap layered on top" could only be elegant and simple if the
>> basis were absolutely as simple as possible.
>

Am I to surmise that XML like email or port 80 has been seized upon as the
one way we're going to express everything, from jpegs to pi?

> My main argument is that XML is dumb data and should be treated as such.
>

Amen, brother! Smart data ALWAYS bites you in the ass. Alwaysalwaysalways.
That includes natural keys.

> The problem is that all of the other crap attempts to give the data
> "smarts".  That's a recipe for disaster.  For example, the "ant" build
> tool.
>

<what are mummy and daddy talking about?>

> If you need a programming language, you need a programming language.
> Use that.  If you need dumb data, then just use dumb data.  Problems
> arise when the two get confused.
>

Agreed, but data driven programs can be way-cool when done by someone who
knows how.

My take on XML based on what little I know of it is that it's a nice way
to record a small body of relatively static data that you don't need much
history on (unless putting it in SCM is planned), but that it really pales
beside the power of a data base server, relational, hierarchical, or of
just about any design.

-- 
Lan Barnes

SCM Analyst              Linux Guy
Tcl/Tk Enthusiast        Biodiesel Brewer


-- 
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list

Reply via email to