A.M. Kuchling wrote: > IMHO that's a bit extreme. Specifications are written to be detailed, so > consequently they're torture to read. Seen the ReStructured Text spec > lately?
I've read many specs; YAML (both the spec and the format) is easily among the worst ten-or-so specs I've ever seen. ReST and YAML share the same deep flaw: both formats are marketed as simple, readable formats, and at a first glance, they look simple and read- able -- but in reality, they're messy as hell, and chances are that the thing you're looking at doesn't really mean what you think it means (unless you're the official ReST/YAML parser implementation). experienced designers know how to avoid that; the ReST/YAML designers don't even understand why they should. > But YAML seems to have started out with the goal of being human-writable, > something you would write in Emacs, and that seems to have gotten lost; the > format is now just as complicated as Restructured Text, but more cryptic > (the URI namespacing for tags, for example), not really simpler than > XML and in some ways weaker (e.g. only two encodings supported, more > complicated escaping rules). http://www.modelsmodelsmodels.biz/images/hmo033.jpg </F> -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list