On Jul 19, 2006, at 10:55 AM, Tantek Çelik wrote:
On 7/19/06 10:34 AM, "Charles Iliya Krempeaux"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
One "good" thing about XML, IMO, is that for certain simple markups
based on XML, it's easier for a beginner-level or intermediate-level
developer to write a parser for it (as compared to writing a parser
for Micrformats... since HTML is more difficult to parse).
(For example, writing a parser in C, C++, PHP, Java, C# or whatever.)
[...]
This is why the supposed "easier to parse" aspect of XML is incredibly
misleading. It ignores both the need to be easier to publish, and the
fact
that XML, in fact, is *harder* to publish.
Also, the Babel aspect of XML means that you always do need to write a
parser, if not of the XML itself but to transform the
plucked-from-the-air schema and arbitrary choices of what is an
attribute and what an element to the data structure you are using.
A key part of Microformats is converging the schemas so this becomes
much less necessary.
One example of such a simple format based on XML is RSS.
You're kidding right?
It is certainly *not* pretty easy for someone to write a parser for
RSS that
actually works with real RSS on the Web.
Have a look at the Universal Feed Parsers 3000 test cases...
http://feedparser.org
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
