Niklas Peinecke writes:
Nico wrote:
Personally I don't understand the passion for XML;
I do; You can use many standard transformation tools for XML,
those tools can parse-and-generate something else, including
your samba format, but you can't get back from samba to xml.
It's called XSLT (eXtensible Stylesheet Language Transformation).
Believe me, it's short to code, powerful and saves lots of
effort and energy.
don't you believe that a structure like the one following (intended
as an example, not as a proposal) is easier?
It's nice, but
[source]
name=hotbird
type=SAT
diseqc_protocol=1.0
lnb=1
card=1
[mux]
name=rai
source=hotbird
frequency=11766
polarization=v
[programs]
name=rai1
mux=rai
vpid=160
apid=80
.....
If you want to parse this very clean you end up just with the same SAX
like interface you would have with a XML solution.
But above you can't parse with sax, nor can you apply
xsl transformation unless (I Propose this) you
rewrite it minimally to comply with XML, thus I think
the correct universally parseable format would be this:
<source
name="hotbird"
type="SAT"
diseqc_protocol="1.0"
lnb="1"
card="1"
/>
<mux
name="rai"
source="hotbird"
frequency="11766"
polarization="v"
/>
<programs
name="rai1"
mux="rai"
vpid="160"
apid="80"
.....
/>
Emard
Well done, IMO this shows clearly, that XML doesn't need to look like
the mess that WORD (ugh!) produces. Please note that XML 1.0 demands to
have exactly _one_ root element, so it should read: