NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.
All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report
--Larry Wall in perl.c from the perl source code
Stories, comments, journals, and other submissions on use Perl; are Copyright 1998-2006, their respective owners.
Aaaargh! (Score:2)
At least, if you do, don't put it into the XML namespace because that's not what it's producing.
Sorry to come across mad about this, but dealing with invalid XML (and worse, SGML) over the last 5 years has made me bitter and twisted.
For your well formed XML generation needs, I'm open to suggestions as to how I can improve XML::Genx [cpan.org] (within the constraints of the underlying library).
-Dom
Re:Aaaargh! (Score:2)
You really want to see the Perlmonks thread on this (I linked to it in the parent story). XML::Composer can easily produce valid XML and, to be honest, it produces XML much easier than most of the XML modules out there. Rather than slapping my hand when I use a namespace which is illegal or upper-case tags or improperly escaped data (shudder), it trusts me to really mean what I say. However, the fact is that we often have to deal with bad XML and there's no way around it. I hate it. You hate it. We ha
Re:Aaaargh! (Score:2)
And I apologise; I should have read the perlmonks thread first.
As to the name, how about XML::NotWellFormed? It's the most accurate description even if it is an oxymoron.
-Dom
Re:Aaaargh! (Score:2)
I'm leaning towards the name XML::Variant. While I sort of like your name, it really has a strong negative connotation and I don't want to dissaude the poor programmers having to work with bad XML.
Re: (Score:1)
Reply to This
Parent
or... (Score:1)
or
XML::Supposed2B