Re: XMLin question

[ww]

in reply to XMLin question

A1: Use an html entity - < - perhaps (not sure that's valid) or unicode, U+003C (60) .

A2: Well beyond the scope of this reply.... and probably a question asked only in frustration. If you really want an answer, suggest p5p.

[Anonymous Monk]

A2: Well beyond the scope of this reply.... and probably a question asked only in frustration. If you really want an answer, suggest p5p.

How is it a question for p5p? I think it is not

[ww]

Because those active on p5p are among the possible sources of an answer to an extremely esoteric question; an answer that probably would otherwise require the OP have the experience, knowledge and patience to profit by digging thru perlguts and who-knows-what-else.

On the other hand, if you, Anonymonk, can answer it here, I'll be delighted to upvote a brief and correct exposition that's accessible to those of less than Perl Porter stature (like /me).

[Anonymous Monk]

Because those active on p5p are among the possible sources of an answer to an extremely esoteric question; an answer that probably would otherwise require the OP have the experience, knowledge and patience to profit by digging thru perlguts and who-knows-what-else.

p5p does not develop or maintain XML::Simple, asking them about XML::Simple is offtopic and annoying

On the other hand, if you, Anonymonk, can answer it here, I'll be delighted to upvote a brief and correct exposition that's accessible to those of less than Perl Porter stature (like /me).

Wait, what? What question?

[7stud]

Because those active on p5p are among the possible sources of an answer to an extremely esoteric question

Esoteric question? The question is typical for people who have only a vague notion of what XML is, and therefore they don't know the basic rules of XML, and they are trying to parse broken XML.