Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2014 19:03:56 +0200 From: Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@freebsd.org> To: Jos Backus <jos@catnook.com> Cc: arch@freebsd.org, Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org>, Jordan Hubbard <jkh@mail.turbofuzz.com>, "Simon J. Gerraty" <sjg@juniper.net> Subject: Re: XML Output: libxo - provide single API to output TXT, XML, JSON and HTML Message-ID: <20140730170355.GM37672@ivaldir.etoilebsd.net> In-Reply-To: <CAETOPp3wedFRmDTTX4kfm-AoyB2bk-pUEOfO5WSM8M_i186Hyw@mail.gmail.com> References: <A1E63A7A-BB38-4CC3-B5EC-B251BE990572@mail.turbofuzz.com> <CAETOPp0c1xfMj1vDvQRSoV3ec-LdJmyT9AFH02iziN0yuY1D-A@mail.gmail.com> <CAJ-VmomiwUWHWYLdLcQAnp7QBmvQR2wfPoCy=eie-jrvyw0HfA@mail.gmail.com> <CAETOPp3zkpp4PY-CeA4Ei=r7_tw1S6rVYiniU%2BZxQF3PESVAxA@mail.gmail.com> <20140729232338.40AA6580A2@chaos.jnpr.net> <CAETOPp1xcNZW1YdgVErZ2ngJM5D3p%2BL3HJHE2aKOvEvSh6Sh%2Bw@mail.gmail.com> <20140730034641.46ABE580A2@chaos.jnpr.net> <CAETOPp2_dwqeLwYOatS-SrP5FYYYJA%2BGCK2qUsCVTyX4MJ7Yeg@mail.gmail.com> <20140730071500.GF37672@ivaldir.etoilebsd.net> <CAETOPp3wedFRmDTTX4kfm-AoyB2bk-pUEOfO5WSM8M_i186Hyw@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[-- Attachment #1 --]
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 09:18:40AM -0700, Jos Backus wrote:
> On Jul 30, 2014 12:15 AM, "Baptiste Daroussin" <bapt@freebsd.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 09:44:17PM -0700, Jos Backus wrote:
> > > On Jul 29, 2014 8:46 PM, "Simon J. Gerraty" <sjg@juniper.net> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, 29 Jul 2014 16:30:53 -0700, Jos Backus writes:
> > > > >> You certainly cannot wait for all of it to arrive before you start
> > > > >> rendering.
> > > > >
> > > > >Understood. This is why a serialization output format that supports
> > > > >streaming data is useful.
> > > >
> > > > Indeed; XML works fine for that.
> > >
> > > Not to beat a dead horse, but so does YAML, and it's more
> lightweight/less
> > > verbose so I personally find it more elegant. But sure, XML would work
> as
> > > well.
> > >
> > YAML is not more lightweight at all, it is really heavy to parse compared
> to
> > XML or JSON.
>
> By lightweight I meant syntax verbosity, not computational load (although
> it seems easy to emit). It's a more flexible format, and that comes with a
> certain price. The question is whether that flexibility is needed or
> useful. If JSON can't be used because of its limitations, I would
> personally prefer the less verbose YAML over XML.
>
About json what limitation are you talking about?
In yaml you have 2 syntax, on which is inconsistent but user friendly and the
other which as ugly as XML imho
this_is_string: treu
this__bool: true
so_if_i_want_a_string_true_i_need_quote: "true"
If I want to be consistent I need to use the canonical form of yaml:
---
!!map {
? !!str "so_if_i_want_a_string_true_i_need_quote"
: !!str "true",
? !!str "this__bool"
: !!bool "true",
? !!str "this_is_string"
: !!str "treu",
}
and now this is very very ugly :(
Plus yaml is context dependant and space dependant resulting in people getting lost about:
"Why this yaml is not valid":
hu: ha
hi:
- test
- test2
Or why this one is not valid either?
hu: ha
hi: test
I have been there with pkg(8) after being a huge suppoter of YAML I'm now more moderated :)
YAML was not machine friendly at all in the end and very very error prone for humans :(
regards,
Bapt
[-- Attachment #2 --]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
iEYEARECAAYFAlPZJXsACgkQ8kTtMUmk6EwPrgCeIxpG5zQBeuKRa/3McD3UnNjy
trAAn3/K/mbSzbb2FWzc4mfkTqiXt/wd
=e/5o
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20140730170355.GM37672>