--- On Thu, 21/8/08, Ricardo SIGNES <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > * chromatic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-08-20T13:59:14] > > Aren't these two separate concerns, human versus > machine readability? The > > latter rarely respects ambiguity. > > Yes. > > Right now, there seem to be two pro-YAML arguments. > > (1) It's easier to for humans read. ... > (2) YAML is better suited for complex serialization than > JSON.
As far as I can see, the (non-unanimous) consensus appears to be: 1. YAML is prettier. 2. JSON, unlike YAML, is stable. (Sounds more like pros and cons for choosing a romantic partner than a serialization language) Since the primary issue with diagnostics today is that it's not machine-readable and that's the primary reason we need it, I should think this is a slam-dunk issue. If that's not enough to convince folks, though, I have a final argument that I (hope) should put this to rest. Let's not forget that the debated requirement for diagnostics is that the generators and consumers speak the same language, not that the *consumer* emit anything in particular. If you prefer the appearance of YAML to JSON, have the consumer transform the JSON to YAML and print that. Problem solved. Cheers, Ovid -- Buy the book - http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/perlhks/ Tech blog - http://use.perl.org/~Ovid/journal/ Twitter - http://twitter.com/OvidPerl Official Perl 6 Wiki - http://www.perlfoundation.org/perl6
