On Tue, 21 Sep 2021 13:12:10 -0500, Michael F. Stemper wrote:
> On the prolog thread, somebody posted a link to:
> <https://dirtsimple.org/2004/12/python-is-not-java.html>
>
> One thing that it tangentially says is "XML is not the answer."
>
> I read this page right when I was about to write an XML parser to get
> data into the code for a research project I'm working on.
> It seems to me that XML is the right approach for this sort of thing,
> especially since the data is hierarchical in nature.
>
> Does the advice on that page mean that I should find some other way to
> get data into my programs, or does it refer to some kind of misuse/abuse
> of XML for something that it wasn't designed for?
>
> If XML is not the way to package data, what is the recommended approach?
1'st can I say don't write your own XML parser, there are already a
number of existing parsers that should do everything you will need. This
is a wheel that does not need re-inventing.
2nd if you are not generating the data then you have to use whatever data
format you are supplied
as far as I can see the main issue with XML is bloat, it tries to do too
many things & is a very verbose format, often the quantity of mark-up can
easily exceed the data contained within it.
other formats such a JSON & csv have far less overhead, although again
not always suitable.
As in all such cases it is a matter of choosing the most apropriate tool
for the job in hand.
--
Antonym, n.:
The opposite of the word you're trying to think of.
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
