Zipped XML sounds like a bad idea. It's slow and bad. I say XCF forever.

srvmshr 30 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

Pardon my ignorance about formats, but between XML & JSON, what would have made them choose XML? As I understand there is lot more tooling, standards & existing software examples around JSON for project & records management (e.g. VSCode's records as settings.json for example). Wasn't XML spearheaded by Microsoft but mostly used by Microsoft today?

	▲	cozzyd 26 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		json's only advantage is it's easier to write by hand, but that's not really a consideration here. XML has schema support and much more tooling available.

▲

EvanAnderson an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

SQLite would have been a lot better choice, in my opinion.

▲

Arainach an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

> It's slow and bad.

Seems to have been working great for MS Office.

▲

dijit 36 minutes ago | parent [-]

“Great”.

No offence to anyone, but I would not consider the performance of MS office to be great.

I guess it's comparative, but then I compare to its previous editions which used a sliver of the resources to accomplish 95% of what modern o365 does.

	▲	mdp2021 13 minutes ago \| parent \| next [-]
		> previous editions... used a sliver of the resources Well of course, but given that the previously employed technique was blitting, fliedumping memory areas, you can't be more efficient than that. Using XML is for transparency (readability). (And, note, in context, I regard the ms office file format as lousy. The OpenOffice/LibreOffice format is good.)
	▲	Ygg2 29 minutes ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Office documents since the 2007 have used a zipped XML approach. Just take an .docx and open it in 7zip. EDIT: Narrowed the date.