A quick poll: XML support

[John Wiegley]

Hello ledger users,

I'm working on getting a release candidate for 3.0 ready in the next
few weeks, and one of the pieces not yet written is the XML export/
import support. I'm wondering how important this is to the people on
the list, and how many of you would not upgrade if it were missing.

Thanks, John

[Mike Bishop]

Others have better expressed my opinion--

http://harmful.cat-v.org/software/xml/

Save your time ...

Rgds,
--
Mike Bishop
Willow, Alaska

[Peter Keen]

Yeah, I don't really care about the xml output. If I'm writing a
script I'm going to be outputing a custom format anyway.

[Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy]

On 10/28/09, John Wiegley <jwie...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hello ledger users,
>
> I'm working on getting a release candidate for 3.0 ready in the next few weeks,

> and one of the pieces not yet written is the XML export/import support. I'm

> wondering how important this is to the people on the list, and how many of you
> would not upgrade if it were missing.

I would.
--
Duy

[Andreas Reuleaux]

This can just as well postponed to a 3.x release,
I would certainly upgrade to 3.0 without XML export/import

-Andreas

On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 07:03:41PM -0400, John Wiegley wrote:
>

[Andrew Potter]

Another vote in the "don't need XML" camp.

But thanks anyways ;)

[Derek Mahar]

I don't use the XML support.

Derek

[John Wiegley]

On Oct 27, 2009, at 7:41 PM, Mike Bishop wrote:

> Others have better expressed my opinion--
>
> http://harmful.cat-v.org/software/xml/

It looks like full XML support will not block the 3.0 release. :) I
may code in export, since that is fairly trivial (and partly
completed), but certain not import as of yet.

Thanks everyone, John

[Karl Fogel]

How would this be different from the XML format supported in Ledger
2.6.2 (which I guess is the same as / similar to GnuCash's format)?
Or is that the format you're talking about?

FWIW, I'd use it, but it's not decisive.

-Karl

[David Roundy]

Don't use it.

David

[dhn]

I used it exactly one time to migrate from gnucash. I won't need it
again, but other new users may find themselves in this situation.

DN

On Oct 27, 7:03 pm, John Wiegley <jwieg...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Tony Edgecombe]

Don't use it.

CSV output would be nice though :)

Tony

2009/10/28 dhn <daniel....@gmail.com>:

[Simon Michael]

Don't need it right now. Reading gnucash files is a nice feature, but perhaps it belongs in a separate tool.

[John Wiegley]

On Oct 29, 2009, at 5:04 AM, Tony Edgecombe wrote:

> CSV output would be nice though :)

Try the "csv" report. :)

John

[Alan Bram]

Hi,

I use XML output occasionally, so I would need that in order to upgrade.

Thanks!

Cheers,
- ar

[Winter Cammry]

I'm a little late to the discussion - sorry.

I use XML output extensively for outputting invoices etc. The simple
XML out option in 2.6.2 would be nice. Though, if it's not important
to anyone else, then don't bother.

[John Wiegley]

On Nov 8, 2009, at 4:14 AM, Winter Cammry wrote:

> I use XML output extensively for outputting invoices etc. The simple
> XML out option in 2.6.2 would be nice. Though, if it's not important
> to anyone else, then don't bother.

Now that the Python support is working, it shouldn't be hard at all to
write an XML generator in that language.

John

[John Wiegley]

On Nov 8, 2009, at 4:14 AM, Winter Cammry wrote:

> I use XML output extensively for outputting invoices etc. The simple
> XML out option in 2.6.2 would be nice. Though, if it's not important
> to anyone else, then don't bother.

Ok, I have restored the XML output. It provides as much information
as 2.x did, plus a little extra. However, the format has changed
rather substantially. The tag names, the nesting, and some tags are
now attributes.

I'll be pushing this to the next branch before I head to sleep.

John

[John Wiegley]

Note also that the XML output has no formatting anymore. I recommend
this:

ledger xml | tidy -q -indent -xml -utf8

Provided you have the tidy command installed on your system.

John

[Winter Cammry]

Thanks for all your work on this John! I'll dig in now and see what I
need to do to use 3. Cheers!