• @blackstrat@lemmy.fwgx.uk
    link
    fedilink
    438 months ago

    XML is a superior format to Json or yaml or any of those other trendy formats around today. It’s the hill I’m willing to die on because I’m right.

    • Chris
      link
      fedilink
      English
      218 months ago

      I can only assume you’ve never tried to parse or read XML.

      • @Sphks@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        68 months ago

        From my point of view : it has a hudge ecosystem with tons of robust libraries. This does not make it perfect, but for an industrial point of view, you don’t look for new shiny clean things. (My point of view is 15 years old yet…)

        • magic_lobster_party
          link
          fedilink
          138 months ago

          I think JSON is more robust than XML by now. Mostly due to its simplicity. There are few reasons why anyone would pick XML over JSON these days.

      • key
        link
        fedilink
        English
        138 months ago

        Something being “old” is totally unrelated to whether it’s trendy. See: virtually every food and fashion trend.

          • ShieldGengar
            link
            fedilink
            2
            edit-2
            8 months ago

            Ah, alright. Trendy does have a negative connotation with it as well; as opposed to “established” i.e. this trend will pass. Also, note the addition of “data formats that are around today” is clearly a jab at the age of JSON and nothing else.

            Saying the data format that’s easier to work with and parse while being nearly as old is trendy, is kinda disingenuous, no?

    • @RonSijm@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      148 months ago

      Uh-huh… ever tried to integrate with a poorly implement WCF service? Like communication from a Java service to a dotnet service through a WSDL?

      I’ll take a json API over XML any day

      • @nogooduser@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        118 months ago

        I’m not sure that’s the fault of XML though.

        It’s more the fault of the implementation and documentation.

        We have a WCF service with an odd configuration and nobody has been able to integrate with it that didn’t use Microsoft tools. It’s definitely not XML’s fault.

        (That service has been replaced with a REST API now)

        • @RonSijm@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          6
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          It’s more the fault of the implementation and documentation.

          Yea sure. Though it’s slightly XMLs fault for allowing that kinda implementations. Every random thing is in it’s own obscure namespace with 20 levels of nested objects in different namespaces, and if you get anything wrong it barely explains what’s wrong, and just refuses to work.

          It’s mostly WCFs fault. I just automatically associate XML with nightmare flashbacks of implementing WCF stuff

    • redfellow
      link
      fedilink
      98 months ago

      As someone who works with both, readability is the utmost important thing for me, and XML is cumbersome and has more characters to sift through to find what I’m lookin for.

    • @banshee@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      48 months ago

      I don’t miss XML, but at least it has support for comments. On the other hand, I wish whitespace in XML wasn’t significant. JSON needs to die in favor of JSON 5.

    • @Moldy@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      Nah, XML is just a slightly older fad. Let’s go back to S Expressions. They’ve been in use for over 60 years and have significantly better readability.

  • I am so old that I worked with SGML. Compared to that, XML is a lovely language. And sometimes I still miss writing XSLT to quickly transform some XML documents. These days you can do similar things with JSON, of course. But it’s not as easy and standardized as the XML tooling.