Well, suppose I have two XML files, one using <name-first> and the other using <first-name>. An XSL script can convert between them. Or I can convert the data manually using any text editor. Fifteen years from now, when the original programs are long dead, I will still have my address data in a format I can read and use.
More to the point, I should slap the developers for not coordinating on a standard. That is what committees like W3C are for. The vcard XML format sounds like a winner to me. We have email standards, and all email clients support them: POP, SMTP, etc. Why not some W3C-approved XML address format? XML is more than a buzzword, it's an important new standard. The reading of XML files via SAX or DOM is facilitated by open-source parsers and is not complex at all. XML is a machine-ready format. I can't see how proprietary formats are any less work. Mark > (All the same, as the author of PhoneDeck, I feel called on the carpet > here. It's off-topic for this list, though, so I'll just say that > while XML is certainly the buzzword of the day, it doesn't make things > as easy as the hype would have us believe. What good would be > XML-enabled PhoneDeck *and* TheBat, if PhoneDeck had a <name-first> > tag and TheBat! had <first-name>? No good at all. Second, reading XML, > whether through DOM or SAX, is a very complex process. PhoneDeck's > addressbook format, while technically "proprietary", is perfectly > readable to human eye, and is very easy to parse, much easier than XML > will ever be. So is CSV export. Can't say that about TheBat's > addressbook, though ;) > Best regards, > .marek jedlinski ________________________________________________ Current version is 1.62 | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
