CFML as XML… Nice!

The guys at have raised the concept of an XML-compliant standard for CF. Frankly, I think this is an awesome idea – a guaranteed Good Thing.

As they point out, of course there are the issues of non-compliant existing code, etc. But really, if you can do standards-compliant HTML (XHTML), why not CF? Surely doing so means you’re taking better care of what you’re doing.

Within the known limitations, me and my crew already do this at ITR. I push them pretty hard on it, as I’m very pro standards compliance.

Ben Forta’s blog entry stating Blackstone won’t be XML-based is a little disappointing. Hopefully, they’ll push it for whatever CF 8 is to be.

2 Replies to “CFML as XML… Nice!”

  1. The best argument against forcing CFML documents into XML is that CF is, and always has been a very forgiving language on developers. That’s one of the big reasons for it’s popuplarity: almost anyone can make a simple ColdFusion page with just a little bit of instruction.

    Maybe the right choice is similar to with HTML: You have a “standards compliant” mode that is activated by putting a DTD at the top of your CFML file, or you have a “forgiving” mode that allows all of the odd vagaries that ColdFusion has always allowed.

  2. 1. Well… are you also going to push for C# to be XML compliant? Virtues are not always the answer… sometimes you need strength not gentil handling… sometimes the reverse.

    2. DTD’s are not XML compliant. Why would you push for XML compliance… then use an standard that is not based on XML? You should change that to schemas to be consistant. ( this one was funny to me )

    3. Remember… that in custom tags… you would get errors in many tags if you added the slash in the custom tags. It depends on how the tags are written… you may cause bigger issues than you think with requiring XML. CF is very legit without this also… there isn’t a need to convert a language to XML. VB doesn’t need to become XML, C# doesn’t need to become XML, and in reality… I doubt it is needed by ColdFusion.

    4. It would be neat to be XML for the sake of being neet. That isn’t why people use Coldfusion. It is also doubtful C# or ASP.NET users will convert to CF or not convert on this basis. It is not likely that it will make or break more than a couple of decisions on using CF. Other than being “XML Compliant”… what actual advantage would there be? (Breaking Blue Dragon… making all existing tools fail to work…) It seems to me there are many reasons not to do this, and XML is about data and documents… next we will have someone saying the english language needs to be XML compliant!

Leave a Reply