[WF-Protocols] Proposals on common format

[Chuck Adams]

The obvious suggestion from this corner would be atlas.  It has quite a few 
less special syntax cases than YAML, and also supports lists, maps, 
strings, ints, and floats without need for a schema.  It's been implemented 
so that its serialized format is independent of the structure, and there's 
bindings in several languages already.  The current implementation has an 
event driven parser ala SAX, and a C++ interface generator to support 
higher level parsing and unparsing into your chosen format.

Atlas has bindings in C++, Java, Python, and Perl (via XS to Atlas-C++).  
The source is currently the reference and best documentation, though there 
are production projects that make use of it.  The most popular 
serialization format is described at this URL:

http://purple.worldforge.org/cvs/forge/protocols/atlas/spec/bach_syntax.html

chuck

> On Mon, Jun 30, 2003 at 01:45:03PM +0200, Jorrit Tyberghein wrote:
> | 1. I think it is best to use XML for the format for the following 
> reasons:
> |        - XML is standard.
> |        - XML is easy to read and write. Lots of tools and libraries 
> exist.
> |        - XML can also be read/written in binary format if needed.
>
> As an alternative, you may want to consider YAML.   YAML has the 
> advantage that it doesn't have a 'DOM', that is, it uses native
> lists and maps in memory.    http://yaml.org
>
> Best,
>
> Clark
> _______________________________________________
> Protocols mailing list
> Protocols at mail.worldforge.org
> http://mail.worldforge.org/lists/listinfo/protocols
>