From: "NAKAMURA, Hiroshi" <nahi@...>
Date: 2003-03-01T10:44:36+09:00
Subject: Re: XmlConfigFile usage

Hi,

> From: <jbritt@ruby-doc.org>
> Sent: Saturday, March 01, 2003 2:02 AM

> > So this isn't a very good situation to be in: if I write (say) Ruby code to
> > implement the first case, and then I need to import the XML into (say) Perl,
> > I will have to rewrite everything from scratch in Perl, save the actual
> > low-level parsing of the XML.

You can use SOAP and XML-RPC for over-language interoperability
though XML-RPC is has several constraints about interoperable object
as said in this thread (multi-ref object graph, multi-byte char like
Japanese, user defined type, nil and empty string).

> > With YAML, it's defined for you: and therefore, it will interoperate with
> > other YAML implementations, in the sense that a hash created on machine A
> > will be turned into the same hash on machine B. It also defines ways of
> > encoding common scalar data types, graph structures where the same object
> > appears at several points, user-defined types, and so forth.

SOAP as well.  From data serialization point of view,
YAML is XML + XML Namespace(sort-of) + SAX(stream model) +
DOM(tree model) + XML Schema Datatypes Part2(build-in types) +
SOAP Encoding(Collection and Mapping), all-in-one spec. [ruby-talk:54657]

> The comparisons between XML and YAML miss the mark because one is a general syntax specification for creating markup languages,
and
> the other is a specific markup language format.  It makes more sense, perhaps, to compare YAML with (X)HTML, or SOAP/XML-RPC
> serialization, or RD, ot RDoc, or some other format that has predefined semantics.

Sure.  (I think 'RDoc' is for an embedding format and I call the markup
'SimpleMarkup' from its class name, though.)

There's a brief summary of marshal/data serialization in Ruby.
http://rrr.jin.gr.jp/rwiki?cmd=view;name=Marshal

I should check detail of YAML implementation and add it here...

Regards,
// NaHi