While we could make XML the standard, why shouldn't we just include it alongside the plaintext human readable revision without markup tags.
I agree. Use the XML version as the base format, and transform that XML into plain text (or pdf, jpg, postscript, etc.) from there. Great solution and I believe that is what this discussion is leading to.
do I really care if there is a seperate XML revision from the plaintext? No I do not. I don't care if we make adobe pagemaker versions. I just don't want to lose the plaintext.
Exactly. That's what the XML version provides: one consistent base format through which all others are derived, making the final text, Adobe PageMaker, whatever... versions identical in content to the original XML version. Plain text is one of those formats, and if you prefer to read it in that format, you can do so.
Finally let's leave this will a bit of my own dealing with XML. I work for a company that produced a major aplication we moved from standard plaintext config files and plaintext logfiles to XML based. This in turn made tweaking and troubleshooting much more difficult than it was worth.
Why did your company move from plain text to XML? What tools were you using to process the XML? Moving to XML "Just Because(tm)", is not a good reason to move that direction. There's a lot of "XML is the Future" FUD flying around, and too many people are believing it. Without a solid reason for migrating to XML (as for config files in your case), then its the wrong solution. David A. Desrosiers desrod@gnu-designs.com http://gnu-designs.com