Ayende @ Rahien

Jay Flowers commented on Xml: All the way or none at all

Tue, 12 Jun 2007 17:32:52 GMT

Oops that should be: | | \ / ]> &include;

Jay Flowers commented on Xml: All the way or none at all

Tue, 12 Jun 2007 17:31:06 GMT

I think this will work better for where MS technology is at the moment: ]> &include;

Ayende Rahien commented on Xml: All the way or none at all

Tue, 12 Jun 2007 17:15:00 GMT

1/ eventually is not a concern of mine, unless it is next week. 2/ parsing, naturally. Imperative logic, easy to follow & debug. There is very little that needs to be done to build something like: #include "foo.bar" And that is the most primitive of the include options.

Andrey Shchekin commented on Xml: All the way or none at all

Tue, 12 Jun 2007 16:47:45 GMT

You are right about this one -- xi is not supported by MS processors right now, so I should have used this as an argument. But there is two bonus points still: 1. it will occasionally get supported without any work form your side; 2. what is easier -- write an xslt that will do include for some of your files before sending them or parse vendor DSL to add include capability? Also, talking of XSLT, you can use XSLT to make any cutomised report or representation of original file. Even nice-looking diff between 2 of them. I see your point, and as for me, I may prefer DSL for my own config files/whatever, but it should be XML for most limited DS languages that are not owned by me and not open source.

Andrey Shchekin commented on Xml: All the way or none at all

Tue, 12 Jun 2007 16:47:45 GMT