X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com X-Original-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=mGD9Ib3EtSehybg1Vp05OSfSB02LtwoFBtHlSKH4rMU=; b=rY1/LYZjhQeLA0fDoZMsoeiF4mBrEAmyo37Km5y5QkFlROrrKsCKgILogmRruvW+aB oHIVkNnaDj9pQ1v3qLi9th1+SMPjPRmX5V/PNoPvQQW9D2tNC1FBljQR3ZKVeKMgOGj2 oT095EObRHlcZTMMeOg6yFGzcsj4Zp0xzJRMu5uUjyvXNAsfY7rqhcOUn9BbLEwRbka8 UK64OEILCQNFMjRCQM744tqybjGZ/Ybc2XA5wg87JSvxt7eVzZoe+g9SCUjQpdUWy3oa S9XkmMv9LE6upNrZg8PWPtiYJUbwYBwYhb82Ak55zj7v92EDd6R5v1w8d4ruJ6kOb9/v XJDw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.28.125.147 with SMTP id y141mr14540815wmc.18.1450636388815; Sun, 20 Dec 2015 10:33:08 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20151220125839.10228.qmail@stuge.se> References: <20151220122659 DOT 378AF809D791 AT turkos DOT aspodata DOT se> <20151220120219 DOT c4644eef1a65b0eb2fb60d76 AT gmail DOT com> <20151220125839 DOT 10228 DOT qmail AT stuge DOT se> Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2015 09:33:08 -0900 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [geda-user] XML file format (what could be expected) From: "Britton Kerin (britton DOT kerin AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11419974a784160527589af4 Reply-To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com X-Mailing-List: geda-user AT delorie DOT com X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com Precedence: bulk --001a11419974a784160527589af4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 3:58 AM, Peter Stuge (peter AT stuge DOT se) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com] wrote: > Nicklas Karlsson (nicklas DOT karlsson17 AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com] > wrote: > > I do not think file format is important. > > You are absolutely right about this, the data model is the challenge, > not how to store it, that's trivial. > But if you're going to go with a plain text format, you'd want a good reason to choose XML, as its the least readable option. > > It is better to bring discussion to the structure itself, if > > visualized as a tree which forks and attributes are needed. > > Indeed the structure (data model) is what we need to come up with. > > Use all known constructs. Storing them is again not the problem. > > > For trees I only know about one implementation detail that matter: > > No implementation details matter. That is all easy. > And yet YAML and JSON got invented and hugely popular precisely because XML is so ugly and the parsers for it are somewhat harder to deal with. Britton --001a11419974a784160527589af4 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 3:58 AM, Peter Stuge (peter AT stuge DOT se) [via = geda-user AT delorie DOT com] <geda-user AT delorie DOT com> wrote= :
Nicklas Karlsson (nicklas DOT karlsson17 AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]= wrote:
> I do not think file format is important.

You are absolutely right about this, the data model is the challenge= ,
not how to store it, that's trivial.

But if you're going to go with a plain text format, you= 9;d want a good reason to choose XML, as its the least readable option.
=C2=A0
> It is better to bring discussion to the structure itself, if
> visualized as a tree which forks and attributes are needed.

Indeed the structure (data model) is what we need to come up with.
Use all known constructs. Storing them is again not the problem.

> For trees I only know about one implementation detail that matter:

No implementation details matter. That is all easy.
=

And yet YAML and JSON got invented and hugel= y popular precisely because XML is so ugly and the parsers for it are somew= hat harder to deal with.
=C2=A0
Britton

--001a11419974a784160527589af4--