From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <3e1162e60705211318l47ee4caew4b7e21e45a720c9d@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 21 May 2007 13:18:22 -0700 From: "David Leimbach" To: "Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs" <9fans@cse.psu.edu> Subject: Re: [9fans] XML In-Reply-To: <13426df10705211033v648ff5c9jee3c732718b28d6@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <13426df10705210957w2982fa31lc6c22ff554fcd629@mail.gmail.com> <1179767515.8323.193.camel@linux.site> <13426df10705211033v648ff5c9jee3c732718b28d6@mail.gmail.com> Topicbox-Message-UUID: 6e160014-ead2-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 On 5/21/07, ron minnich wrote: > On 5/21/07, Roman Shaposhnik wrote: > > > Seriously, though, we all hate XML so much for all the right reasons > > that we kind of forget that it can be useful. I do have a couple of > > use cases I consider XML being appropriate at. But what about you guys? > > It's good at what it's good for. I think the move to XML as the > universal glue is more driven because people are desperate for > something and XML is all they can see . > > But it's very sad to see people talking about binary converters and > XML co-processors, or to watch 100 bytes of data contained in 3000 > bytes of XML ... > > ron > I've actually seen FPGAs set up for XML processing... I thought that was quite amusing :-)