digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

See the original image at w3.org

XML in 10 points

w3.org — If you are new to XML, it may be hard to know where to begin. This summary in 10 points attempts to capture enough of the basic concepts to enable a beginner to see the forest through the trees.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • lasVegas702, on 05/01/2008, -2/+7This was a fantastic article, a newbie must read, thank you w3.

    edit: wtf why isnt the +digg button working?
    • bkemper, on 05/01/2008, -1/+1Because you're not logged in. The log in is at the top now.
      • BooshTukka, on 05/01/2008, -0/+2If he commented, he is obviously logged in.
    • Wakuko, on 05/01/2008, -2/+0XML is news?

      1998 called, they want their XML back!

      HTML in 10 points at eleven!

      The Atari 2600 is the new black!
      • funkytaco, on 05/01/2008, -0/+1Revised 13 Nov. 2001 (last update: $Date: 2003/06/02 19:08:30 $)

        Better?
    • known, on 05/01/2008, -0/+1And on why XML sucks http://xmlsucks.org/
  • rmxz, on 05/01/2008, -19/+13XML in 2 points.

    1. It's a verbose way of writing s-expressions that lisp fans used for years.
    < html > < body > wow I type a lot < / body > < / html >
    (html (body "Isn't this easier"))

    2. It's clunky enough that all the XML community's favorite document types (DTDs, CSS, etc.) aren't XML.

    • 955701, on 05/01/2008, -9/+2...
    • TopBanana, on 05/01/2008, -1/+14DTDs are depracated in favour of XML Schema. CSS hasn't got anything to do with XML.

      But I agree with you in that it can appear clunky. The best thing about it is that it's broadly accepted.
      • ttfkam, on 05/01/2008, -1/+1And the big, bloated mess (aka XML Schema) should be deprecated in favor of RelaxNG. Once you see a SANE schema language, it's hard to go back. As for CSS, it isn't an XML syntax, but it's the standard way to stylize XML, so it would be false to say that is has nothing to do with XML.
    • niczar, on 05/01/2008, -2/+11You're so right, s-expressions are exactly the same as XML, ... Well, they don't support i18n, nor do they support namespaces, extensibility, nor do they have standardized ways of transforming them (XSLT), creating pointers to parts of a document (XLink), or using it to display data (XHTML, SVG, XSL-FO, ODF and so on), but it's really the same thing!
      / no
      // your nonsensical rant was already tired 5 years ago
      • Duositex, on 05/01/2008, -1/+3I'm glad you said this. I'm so tired of lispies saying how great it is.
      • rompom7, on 05/01/2008, -0/+2I think rmxz was commenting more on syntax, not features. I am sure if a little time was spent creating a decent specification, which includes the features you point out, it would make an outstanding alternative to XML.
    • drmangrum, on 05/01/2008, -1/+4You need to learn more about XML and actually use it before you spout off about things you obviously have limited exposure too.
    • mc_hambone, on 05/01/2008, -0/+8RTFA, especially point 4 - you're comparing a programming language to a structured data format:

      XML is NOT for programming. It is a data format that is more easily debuggable (with the eye) than binary, flat files, and parentheses-laden lisp statements (for any elements more than a few levels deep, can you imagine how hard it would be to figure out the current context?).
    • Topher06, on 05/01/2008, -1/+2If this guy doesn't know why XML is infintely better then Lisp for describing data, then there is no point arguing with this guy.
    • Wakuko, on 05/01/2008, -1/+2Keep arguing about XML and S-Exps while JSON ***** you all up by the ass.
      • ttfkam, on 05/01/2008, -2/+1Any technology that relies on eval() to work is just begging for security violations when exposing a public interface, i.e., a web URL. Or was that the ass ***** you were referring to?
  • irishpolyglot, on 05/01/2008, -8/+2So THAT's why it got on the front page :-P If I ever want an article to get popular I'll just say "Damn, the +Digg button doesn't work today!" on an edit to my post!
  • revjustin2, on 05/01/2008, -2/+5Okay - now that I know what XML is, I want to know how it's used and, more importantly, WHY?
    • drmangrum, on 05/01/2008, -0/+8To structure data to be used in a non-proprietary format. A prime example, Google Earth. The overlays are stored in an extended version of XML called KML.
    • ButchersBoy, on 05/01/2008, -7/+2The reason that you're asking why, is the same reason you should never pursue a career in IT.
    • ftyuv, on 05/01/2008, -0/+1It's essentially just a way that an application can internally store data. If you don't program, you don't need XML -- just like you don't need to look at the HTML behind a Web page, you just look at the end product the browser gives you. I don't know why point 1 in the article says otherwise; I can't think why you'd ever need to know XML unless you're writing an app that uses it.
    • 3Den, on 05/01/2008, -0/+1So that when a 3rd party (or other development group) wants to access your data - he doesn't have to read a totally new specification using whatever crazy ideas you came up with writing your code, including whatever inconsistencies are in your crazy file format, and write his parser from scratch.

      It just makes inter-operation easier between parties.. if you tell me you can provide me with XML data - my developers know how to work with and manipulate it.
    • skmice2, on 05/01/2008, -0/+1It's also used for fetching the group of comments below your Digg post.
  • HoratioHellpop, on 05/01/2008, -3/+2FTA: //Revised 13 Nov. 2001 (last update: $Date: 2003/06/02 19:08:30 $)//
    Has XML been modified at all since June 2, 2003 ???
  • polko, on 05/01/2008, -1/+1I can't deal with all those details...
  • Popeiler, on 05/01/2008, -1/+1omg i've been looking for a simple explanation like that for years.
  • mochaman, on 05/01/2008, -0/+2It has made work so much easier for me, and not the least of which it keeps me nicely employed.
  • kadath44, on 05/01/2008, -2/+1Do we really needed this page with fancy images??? cmon w3c...
  • SirVizor, on 05/01/2008, -0/+1More accurate: XML is a way of "marking up" or explaining to a computer hierarchical information (departments have employees, parents have children etc.) using a single plain text file (as opposed to something like, say, relational databases). Everything else just builds up on this idea. Once the text is "marked up" it is much easier for the computer to manipulate the information allowing for many cool things to be done with said information (formatting, transforming, storing, sending, etc.).
  • ellisgl, on 05/01/2008, -2/+3XML is overused. CSV ftw!
    • mijelh, on 05/01/2008, -0/+0by the way, ftw is overused as well
    • laceration, on 05/01/2008, -0/+1You are on to something. XML is a beast to parse. With a little creativity CSV could do anything XML does and is vastly easier to work with.
      • Vektuz, on 05/01/2008, -0/+2Actualy CSV is much harder to parse than XML because it generally doesn't support UTF-8

        Which means besides standard english, its useless for anything else. There's also no standard for how quotes, other commas, newlines, and so on are to be parsed and can often differ from exporter to exporter. XML was designed to at least be unambiguous.
      • ttfkam, on 05/01/2008, -0/+0...as long as "vastly easier" only includes tabular data. For anything with even a modicum of differing structure to it, CSV falls over. How would you represent an XHTML document in CSV? How about the Google Maps API?

        Either you're wrong about CSV or you don't know what "vastly easier" means.
  • neuron79, on 05/01/2008, -0/+3Anyone else think the graphic for point 6 looks like a funky bikini?
  • r3s0p, on 05/01/2008, -2/+0XML is like colored parenthesis.
  • xqb4dpx, on 05/01/2008, -1/+1Articles like these bring me back to the old, Technology-only days of digg.
  • mixmasteralan, on 05/05/2008, -0/+0json is the future
  • supermose, on 05/06/2008, -0/+0XML is used for all sorts of stuff....XSPF playlists are a form of XML - so are iTunes podcasts.

    This is a good summary though - XML is pretty powerful stuff if you are into databases and on the fly generated sites (using XML data and a XSL stylesheet to make XHTML with PHP - wow lots of acronyms)
  • smartj, on 05/08/2008, -0/+0Xml is simply a bridge between data that humans can easily read and computers can easily read. It is a compromise between humans and computers, providing a good middle ground. It is structured but easy to read and understand.

    Xml isn't really a "language" as much as it is a protocol (set of rules) for structuring data.
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.