[majewsky]

Verbosity certainly is an issue with XML, but far from the only one. IMO the main problem of XML is that it was designed as a markup language, but then misused as a data structure serialization language. When used as a markup language, the distinction between attributes and children is meaningful. When serializing data structures, the dichotomy breaks down. For most subfields of a larger data structure, it's not obvious whether to serialize that subfield as an attribute or as a child. Contrast with JSON, which only consists of obvious data structures.

[jackfraser]

> not obvious whether to serialize that subfield as an attribute or as a child.

Attributes are just strings, generally for metadata. I'd probably serialize an object from another language more verbosely. This is where an important distinction needs to be made: the XML format you use for config files or for data exchange from your app to others should not necessarily be just a serialized object from the most convenient form inside your application. If you care about the operators of the app, you'll allow them a more concise format for that kind of thing, and use XSD or your own internal mechanisms to turn that into an object you want to actually work with.

It's the sort of problem people have once, abstract away, and move on from.

[majewsky]

It's also the sort of problem that just doesn't exist at all if you use a real data serialization format from the get-go.

I'm so frustrated with our collective attitude of building abstractions upon abstractions upon abstractions, without ever stepping back and realizing that we're using the wrong tool to begin with.

[eternalban]

This difficulty is of your owm making. An attribute is 'metadata' about the element. A child element is precisely that: another element.

[dasil003]

The fact that you put "metadata" in quotes illustrates the problem.