RE: [binarycloud-dev] BC XML definitons format (XML vs. SML)

[Andreas A. <a.a...@th...>]

Hi Manuel, Alex,

>>I'm kinda unsure. I like both and both is descriptive as well as
>>standardized ;-) But, in the bcp we use the "simple" format
>>and maybe we should keep this convetion throughout.
>>
>>What are you're thoughts on this?
>
>I think you are right, because XML is only really extensible if
>you can later add tags to values to extend the meaning of those
>values. Since you can´t have tags in tag attributes, it is better
>to use SML.

Yes this is a good point. And it would be a mess to rewrite the entire
xml->php behaviour at a later point.

I.e if we want to extend the name tag (just an example, makes not very much
sense in this case):

<bc:module>
  <name>
    <internal>BcHelloWorld</internal>
    <descriptive>Hello World</descriptive>
  </name>
  ..
</bc:module>

Ok, the readbility lacks, especially for very short tags (i.e. <bc:img
id="23" />). But I think it's worth the effort. At a later point we can
support parameters if users want to use it, or they can implement their own
compiler that handles them)

>BTW, MetaL XML files are fully SML.
That's exactly what brought up this thought here :-)

Andi