Ok, now we are getting somewhere! (Re: XML-based configurations)

Ok, at least Erich states something I agree with (and, lets be fair, its also told by Marius on a comment to my previous post): XML should not be pushed where the data to be represented is flat (or flattish - Say, a INI-style configuration is enough with a not-exactly-flat-but-still-unnested configuration). Still, I do not buy XML as adequate. Erich insists on the Apache configuration file as an example of how not to do things - And I agree wholeheartedly: It sucks and makes no sense. However, it’s just too easy to break proper XML nesting (for the love of the FSM, why is it necessary to repeat the element name we are closing?!) to be something I want to deal with when in a hurry. XML might be great as a data interchange language, but -in my always humble opinion- not more than that. PS- Erich, your blog is broken as well ;-) The generated RSS has URLs which repeat the ‘/en’ part. Oh, and about my blog complaining about XML: Yes, I was syndicating another site - And the XML parsing engine I use was somehow b0rked as well. Nah, I don’t feel like changing my blog’s software, it’s mostly fine as it is ;-)