P͎̘̈̈̈Ä͖̈R̛̳̈̈̈S̡͇̈ͧ̈̽̈̈̈ͨÏ̙̐̈̈N͉̈ͤ̈̌̈͑̈̈͊G͓̈̈͐̈̽̈ ̈ͯ̈̈ͫ̈̌̈͛ͅẌ̿̈M͔̈͆̈̄̈̈̈͢L̙̈͋̈ͮ̈̈ ̠̼̈̈̈͋̈͏̈̉Ï̦̓̈ͦ̈̈̊̈Ṉ̈̈ ̷̈̈R̈̈ͣ̈͜Ü̙̹͖̍̈̈̈̈B̥̯̈̈̈̈̚Ÿ͎̱̈̈ͫ̈ ͖͚̈̈͌̈̈̈ͭ͜Ï̳͇̋̈̈̈́̈̈̄S̰̱͚̈̈̈̈̈ͬ͞ ̈̾̈S̡̝̩̈̈̿̈͊̈̈Ï̛̃̈̈M̴̈̀̈ͣ̈̈̈ͅP̈̾̈̈͗̈̈͝ͅL̈̈́̈̒̈Ÿ̷́̈̈ ̈̈̈N̠̪̈̈̈Ö̵̈̈̔̈͟T̈ͧ̈͗̈ͬ̈
On 12-05-08 01:15 PM, Nate Vack wrote:
> On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 11:45 AM, Ross Singer<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> On May 8, 2012, at 10:17 AM, Ethan Gruber wrote:
>>> in. Our data is exclusively XML, so LAMP/Rails aren't really options.
>> ^^ Really? Nobody's going to take the bait with this one?
> I can't see why they would; parsing XML in ruby is simply not possible.