• darganon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I like xml, but it isn’t the easiest to read.

    I hate yaml with a burning passion. At least with JSON you can compress it all down.

    • tony@lemmy.hoyle.me.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      A compliant yaml parser will read json, as they’re essentially siblings… so just write your configs in json and they’ll work, if you dislike yaml.

    • emptyother@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m no fan of XML. It looks messy and the schema is difficult to write, imo. XML works best as a markup language.

      YAML could have been okay if it were stricter with what they consider strings, and used tabs instead of spaces.

      • atzanteol@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Using whitespace was a mistake. I know all the kids love it but it’s just wrong. I’ve never had as much difficulty explaining json or xml to users as I have yaml.

    • schaeferpp@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      We seem to have something in common: there is a serialisation form, we strongly dislike. But what I cannot understand is: why the heck would anyone torture anyone else to read or even write XML? XML is the absolutely worst configuration language I can imagine. I mean: when is something an attribute, when a tag on its own? What is even a list? And don’t forget to include a full HTTP URI for the namespace, otherwise the tag is not defined.

      By the way: all valid JSON is valid yaml as well. So in theory, you can use yaml as JSON with comments.