I have got nothing against XML. It is a good format for DATA, and often is the right choice. But it doesn’t ALWAYS mean it is the right choice :)
So, here is a tongue in cheek retort to Nathan Lee’s tongue in cheek entry :).
10. No need to worry about escaping characters
9. Hmm… what if I don’t want to create a programming language out of it?
8. Self describing data… well apart from the semantics ;)
7. Human readable? Have you see the XML coming out of SOAP?
6. We don’t need heirarchical data
5. It’s working in out project now
4. I don’t need to futz with SAX, DOM, JAXB, blah blah blah, I can just suck in a properties file
3. I am not interop’ing with something else
2. I don’t need a schema
1. Name/value pairs make more sense for what I am doing (see 12) (and not in the form: <name>foo</name><value>bar</value>)
March 1st, 2005 at 10:40 pm
It’s “tongue in cheek”, not “tongue and check”. :/
March 2nd, 2005 at 9:09 am
0. No need to worry about escaping characters!
March 2nd, 2005 at 9:41 am
Good one. *adds to list* ;)
Dion