Re: Bob needs a new catchphrase
From: paul c <toledobythesea_at_dbms.yuc>
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 14:14:37 GMT
Message-ID: <hTI1h.230408$5R2.172845_at_pd7urf3no>
>
> Did you mean CSV? I used that format extensively back in the 90s, as a kind
> of "lowest common format" for data exchange
> between systems? It is, of course, unmanaged data, but it sure is easy.
>
>
>
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 14:14:37 GMT
Message-ID: <hTI1h.230408$5R2.172845_at_pd7urf3no>
David Cressey wrote:
> "paul c" <toledobythesea_at_dbms.yuc> wrote in message
> news:Mvz1h.226612$5R2.204996_at_pd7urf3no...
>> Bob Badour wrote: >>> paul c wrote: >>> >>>> BobTheDataBaseBoy wrote: >>>> ... >>>> >>>>> To quote Allen Holub (a coder): "Just say No to XML". I will add, >>>>> in all its forms. >>>> The thing is, a bunch of people were asleep at the switch when the >>>> internet's growth underlined the need for better transfer formats, so >>>> as often happens the first attempt even though inferior prevailed. >>> I respectfully suggest no new transfer formats were needed in the first >>> place. To the ignorant, everything is a novel idea. Or perhaps better: >>> those who ignore history are doomed to re-invent it. >>> ... >> For my own purposes, not necessarily the rest of the world's, I thought >> CVS was okay.
>
> Did you mean CSV? I used that format extensively back in the 90s, as a kind
> of "lowest common format" for data exchange
> between systems? It is, of course, unmanaged data, but it sure is easy.
>
>
>
I guess I mis-typed and should have said CSV, though I didn't mean to tout it. Its main attraction was simply that various products supported importing or exporting it in some fashion.
Also, I interpreted Bob B's comment as meaning that no new formats are needed, assuming we have conventions for passing catalogue data around, eg., constraints.
p Received on Tue Oct 31 2006 - 15:14:37 CET