Comments on: Uncle Bob on XML http://blog.secosoft.net/2007/05/30/uncle-bob-on-xml/ Matt Secoske's intermittent ramblings on software and life Wed, 19 Nov 2008 21:01:47 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: Matt http://blog.secosoft.net/2007/05/30/uncle-bob-on-xml/#comment-29056 Matt Thu, 31 May 2007 18:30:31 +0000 http://blog.secosoft.net/2007/05/30/uncle-bob-on-xml/#comment-29056 Thank you for the remarks Frank. You pose some very good questions. What is better than XML? Well, that really depends on the situation. There is no one thing that is better than XML, just like there is no one thing that is better than Java or Ruby or Fortran or COBOL. Where XML shines is at the message protocol level. It has overhead, but is human readable, and that makes debugging nicer. However, as my post indicates, there are still issues with XML and interop, though really this is an issue with communication in general. People have different meanings for the same noun/entity/etc, and it becomes a semantics problem. Not necessarily XML's fault, though it really annoys me when I see people saying that XML will lead the way to interop bliss... bullshit. People will do that. A small group of smart people will get together and figure out how to make 2+ disparate systems mash together and work. Yes, I do not like XML, I've said that clearly many times on my blog. You don't have to like the fact that I don't like it. Thats OK too. In the end we all have our preferences. Thank you for the remarks Frank. You pose some very good questions.

What is better than XML? Well, that really depends on the situation. There is no one thing that is better than XML, just like there is no one thing that is better than Java or Ruby or Fortran or COBOL.

Where XML shines is at the message protocol level. It has overhead, but is human readable, and that makes debugging nicer.

However, as my post indicates, there are still issues with XML and interop, though really this is an issue with communication in general. People have different meanings for the same noun/entity/etc, and it becomes a semantics problem. Not necessarily XML’s fault, though it really annoys me when I see people saying that XML will lead the way to interop bliss… bullshit. People will do that. A small group of smart people will get together and figure out how to make 2+ disparate systems mash together and work.

Yes, I do not like XML, I’ve said that clearly many times on my blog. You don’t have to like the fact that I don’t like it. Thats OK too. In the end we all have our preferences.

]]> By: Frank http://blog.secosoft.net/2007/05/30/uncle-bob-on-xml/#comment-29043 Frank Thu, 31 May 2007 17:52:41 +0000 http://blog.secosoft.net/2007/05/30/uncle-bob-on-xml/#comment-29043 So suggest something better asshat. I'd make an argument on why XML has its place, but I won't bother. It's not like you'd listen anyway. You, like Uncle Bob, have already made up your mind to find every possible flaw in XML because it doesn't strike your fancy. So instead of coming up with something better, you complain that everyone else is using a tool that goes against your personal taste. Get a life. So suggest something better asshat.

I’d make an argument on why XML has its place, but I won’t bother. It’s not like you’d listen anyway. You, like Uncle Bob, have already made up your mind to find every possible flaw in XML because it doesn’t strike your fancy. So instead of coming up with something better, you complain that everyone else is using a tool that goes against your personal taste. Get a life.

]]>