# XmlStruct-1.0.0 released **URL:** \ **Category:** Ruby\ **Created:** [March 22, 2006, 9:54pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/xmlstruct-1-0-0-released/55673 "2006-03-22T21:54:03Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 6\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![neilw](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/n/e36b37/32.png) [@neilw](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/neilw)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2006, 9:54pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/xmlstruct-1-0-0-released/55673/1 "2006-03-22T21:54:03Z")
# XmlStruct [http://rubyforge.org/projects/xmlstruct/](http://rubyforge.org/projects/xmlstruct/) # Documentation [http://xmlstruct.rubyforge.org/](http://xmlstruct.rubyforge.org/) # About XML Markup the simple way. I’ve uploaded a small library to Rubyforge that allows you to markup data using XML tags using direct Ruby assignment following the example of OpenStruct. The library supports attributes and simple text elements - all of which are XML escaped before output. The interface is designed to be as simple as possible, with the least amount of syntactic sugar. The general idea is that you mark up your flat data and output a string containing the markup. The system works best when you have a small amount of data, and a large amount of irritating XML structure to impose upon it. The class came about to allow me to quickly draw up XML messages to send to the UK Government Gateway. Boy can you tell that that schema was designed by committee. I hope that it finds some use somewhere. # Usage I hope the interface is intuitive. Very simply you use assignment commands, e.g ``` require 'rubygems' require 'xml_struct' @xmldoc = XmlStruct.new @xmldoc.GovTalkMessage={:xmlns => ``` “[http://www.govtalk.gov.uk/CM/envelope](http://www.govtalk.gov.uk/CM/envelope)”} @xmldoc.GovTalkMessage.EnvelopeVersion=“2.0” md=@xmldoc.GovTalkMessage.Header.MessageDetails md.Class=“MAFF-IACS-AAPS2001” md.Qualifier=“request” md.Function=“submit” md.CorrelationID md.Transformation=“XML” md.GatewayTimeStamp @xmldoc.GovTalkDetails.Keys.Key[0]={:Type =\> “VendorNumber”} @xmldoc.GovTalkDetails.Keys.Key[0]=275687 @xmldoc.GovTalkDetails.Keys.Key[1]={:Type =\> “MainCPH”} @xmldoc.GovTalkDetails.Keys.Key[1]=“14/02/0327” @xmldoc.GovTalkDetails.Body print @xmldoc.to\_s outputs ``` 2.0
MAFF-IACS-AAPS2001 request submit XML
275687 14/02/0327 ``` # Enjoy Neil W., Aldur Systems Ltd ---
**Author:** ![neilw](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/n/e36b37/32.png) [@neilw](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/neilw)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2006, 10:08pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/xmlstruct-1-0-0-released/55673/2 "2006-03-22T22:08:54Z")
Have you seen the xml builder project? It’s along the same lines but gives a much cleaner syntax. Your example could be done along these lines: xml.GovTalkMessage :xmlns =\> “http …” { |xml| xml.EnvelopeVersion “2.0” xml.Header { xml.MessageDetails { etc, etc } } } Check it out [http://rubyforge.org/projects/builder/](http://rubyforge.org/projects/builder/) ---
**Author:** ![neilw](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/n/e36b37/32.png) [@neilw](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/neilw)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2006, 1:45am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/xmlstruct-1-0-0-released/55673/3 "2006-03-23T01:45:15Z")
Justin B. wrote: > } > > Check it out [http://rubyforge.org/projects/builder/](http://rubyforge.org/projects/builder/) I don’t like the reuse of xml inside of each of the blocks. IIRC it is why I dislike the CGI library. Visually it looks like everything gets appended right to xml, although thinking twice I know that the block scope is actually where the xml addition takes place. xml.MyTag :xmlns+.“…” { |xml| xml.ATag “2.0” xml.BTag { xml.CTag { xml.DTAG { …etc… } } } } The above makes me think I am getting: My brain thinks this at first because of the reuse of “xml”. Now thinking twice I realize that the scope takes precedence, and my brain conforms. It seems like the following would be more approriate, although it would be more typing: xml.MyTag :xmlns+.“…” { |xml| xml.ATag “2.0” xml.BTag { |btag| btag.CTag { |ctag| ctag.DTAG { |dtag| …etc… } } } } This way I can easily visually tell that what the hiearchy looks like in my xml document w/o having to count tabs or curly braces. Zach ---
**Author:** ![neilw](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/n/e36b37/32.png) [@neilw](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/neilw)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2006, 3:08am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/xmlstruct-1-0-0-released/55673/4 "2006-03-23T03:08:56Z")
I’ll add that there’s a partial E4X implementation on RubyForge that could use some TLC too. T. ---
**Author:** ![neilw](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/n/e36b37/32.png) [@neilw](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/neilw)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2006, 6:13am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/xmlstruct-1-0-0-released/55673/5 "2006-03-23T06:13:22Z")
zdennis wrote: > It seems like the following would be more approriate, although it would > be more typing: > > xml.MyTag :xmlns+."…" { |xml| > xml.ATag “2.0” > xml.BTag { |btag| > btag.CTag { |ctag| > ctag.DTAG { |dtag| …etc… } > } > } > } > > This way I can easily visually tell that what the hiearchy looks like in > my xml document w/o having to count tabs or curly braces. If you really want to, that style works fine with XML builder too. require ‘builder/xmlmarkup’ xml = Builder::XmlMarkup.new(:indent=\>2) xml.MyTag { |xml| xml.ATag “2.0” xml.BTag { |btag| btag.CTag { |ctag| ctag.DTAG { |dtag| } } } } puts xml.target! Produces: 2.0 – – Jim W. ---
**Author:** ![neilw](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/n/e36b37/32.png) [@neilw](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/neilw)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2006, 9:09am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/xmlstruct-1-0-0-released/55673/6 "2006-03-23T09:09:31Z")
One man’s meat is another man’s poison. I don’t like the nested braces syntax and my system is not interested in the XML layout. The straight assignment just seems simpler to me, and I find it useful when I’m doing assignments throughout a program rather than in just one place. Builder is much more powerful. I didn’t need the power, but I needed the simplicity. Hence why I built XmlStruct. (That and learning a bit about reflection and meta-programming). NeilW