I think this has more to do with the major software manufacturers than with the actually users of the software. Part of it has to do with the software available. Part of the blame has to go to the Perl community at large. When I say the major software manufacturers, I mean Oracle, Sun, IBM, and Microsoft. The first three have been pushing Java/XML at least three years. Microsoft is, of course, pushing the .NET/XML thing. What company is trying to sell Perl/XML?

Also, getting Perl/XML can be a bit of a challenge for some users, especially Windows users. Due to the lack of a C compilier on 99% of all Windows machines, most Windows Perl users rely on ActiveState for the various ppm packages. While I am very happy with Perl on Windows, I do have issues with some of the package maintanence. Many of XML packages you mention are not available for Windows users who rely on PPM. Now, while I realize many of the us hardcore Perl programmers are using various flavors of Linux or *BSD, many newbies are still on Windows. If the XML packages aren't available for them, they will become Java programmers. I've even had problems get Sablotron working some UNIX platforms, so I've even had to resort to Java for some projects.

Finally, while a lot of great work has gone into the XML packages, it may be that the writers in the Perl community haven't thought of Perl/XML as a good topic for a book. I can't believe that O'Reilly wouldn't publish a Perl/XML book. Possibly, their waiting for the right author (or any author) to step forward. Maybe someone here could write it.

In reply to Re: Why is Perl so bad with XML? by Steve_p
in thread Why is Perl so bad with XML? by ajt

Title:
Use:  <p> text here (a paragraph) </p>
and:  <code> code here </code>
to format your post; it's "PerlMonks-approved HTML":