> for flatter schema's I do personally think TOML is more readable than it's JSON, YAML and XML
Yes. But for nested data, I find TOML becomes the least readable and I have to fall back to YAML or JSON.
Maybe we need just one more ML...
I disagree. The way JSON and YAML nest data with indentation forces data to be disconnected from it's property chain when there are multiple large items at each level. TOML seems to provide a solution to that by allowing deeply nested paths to be declare explicitly at the top level for each item. You get to choose how to split the paths into containers instead of being locked into a 1-to-1 tree structure.
Re:Toml: Tom's Obvious, Minimal Language
by notheguyouthink on Friday July 13, 2018 @11:18AM
(#17523646)
Oh man, I can't disagree more.
I loathe YAML for readability. When I'm 2 pages down on a yaml tree I have no clue how many indents exist before what I'm working on. Likewise, when I scroll up, I quickly lose track of what the actual parent to the data I was working on is. I've found it to be an absolute mess.
JSON doesn't even fit for me, because it's not human intended (imo). Being able to document (comments) configuration is a requirement for me on any config language.
Re:Toml: Tom's Obvious, Minimal Language
by unethical_ban on Friday July 13, 2018 @10:46AM
(#17523350)
https://github.com/toml-lang/toml#array-of-tables
Still there FWIW.
That all said, for flatter schema's I do personally think TOML is more readable than it's JSON, YAML and XML counterparts. If there is one thing I did like about Windows back when I used to run it, it was the syntax of INI files (which TOML was heavily influenced by).
Ultimately though, there is no perfect solution for all problems.