James Stroud wrote: > The reasons given in the blog were fairly precise. I think "only on > vague[...]" is misleading here. The idea of the article was to educate a > Java user how to change his or her frame of reference to better use Python. > > The author was not being territorial as you are implying.
What triggered me is the presence of lots of absolute statements like "XML is not the answer. It is not even the question.", "In Python, XML is something you use for interoperability, not your core functionality, because you simply don't need it for that." and similar. Though the author says at the end "There are also other, very rare, architectural reasons to need XML" he then proceeds to say "Trust me, they don't apply to your app." instead of educating the reader what they are and make him conclude that for himself. The article is actually quite good, but in this particular section the author doesn't explain his advices well. Personally, I the approach "X is good because of Y, except when Z and W, when it's the other way around" better, since IRL it's always so. Mentioning (again, not explaining!) LISP to state XML is laughable is kind of lame, especially since the focus of the article are Python and Java. Again, it's good, but I'd like more explanations and conditionals in that paragraph :) -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
