Did you try using DBD::CSV
pull data from the Access CSV dump? (Which I assume was
dumped using Microsoft's standard save as CSV.) Anyways
nobody keeps data in that format for working, if it is
tabular data then it is destined for life in a relational
database where it is far more easily manipulated than it is
in CSV. (Unless it is going to a financial analyst in which
case it is destined for life in an Excel spreadsheet.)
As for W3C, why waste my time? I don't think that CSV is
an appropriate solution for their problems. It is a
good one for interchanging a lot of the data
that exists within the bond world, which is why there are
standard formats there which have been used for years
specifying CSV formatted data. They are here. They work.
People use them.
And when it comes to management and hype, sometimes that
is life. Personally I prefer it when developers are free
to choose the most cost-effective tools for what they are
doing. (For one thing PHB heavy companies don't do so
well. And companies that always seek to follow the herd
tend to find a lot of nasty cliffs. Big companies have
enough intertia to survive most such cliffs, small ones
do not. Either way, they aren't fun for the developers who
go over them.) If that means XML, that means XML. If it
means CSV, then that means CSV.
When it comes to tabular data
I prefer CSV for several reasons. The first is that it is
easier to see that it is tabular data at a glance. The
second is that I prefer getting a 2 MB file to a 10 MB
file. The third is that it takes a lot less work to set
up a CSV format than it does to set up a DTD, etc. The
fourth is that most people who work with tabular data
already have more tools for CSV than XML. (Try any
For non-tabular data, well CSV is not appropriate for
that. Use the right tool for the job. As for when XML
makes sense for that, I don't have much of an opinion.
I haven't had to solve that problem extensively. Certainly
it was originally designed for that problem space, and the
sheer effort that has gone into XML undoubtably has
resulted in some effective tools for some problems. The
hype has also definitely resulted in it being used for
problems where it doesn't make sense. I just don't know
where the boundaries are.
Posts are HTML formatted. Put <p> </p> tags around your paragraphs. Put <code> </code> tags around your code and data!
Titles consisting of a single word are discouraged, and in most cases are disallowed outright.
Read Where should I post X? if you're not absolutely sure you're posting in the right place.
Please read these before you post! —
Posts may use any of the Perl Monks Approved HTML tags:
You may need to use entities for some characters, as follows. (Exception: Within code tags, you can put the characters literally.)
- a, abbr, b, big, blockquote, br, caption, center, col, colgroup, dd, del, div, dl, dt, em, font, h1, h2, h3, h4, h5, h6, hr, i, ins, li, ol, p, pre, readmore, small, span, spoiler, strike, strong, sub, sup, table, tbody, td, tfoot, th, thead, tr, tt, u, ul, wbr
Link using PerlMonks shortcuts! What shortcuts can I use for linking?
See Writeup Formatting Tips and other pages linked from there for more info.
| & || & |
| < || < |
| > || > |
| [ || [ |
| ] || ] ||