Why are we templating YAML?
You changed the model when you adapted the xml to lisp. You decided that some tags are unnecessary, dropped some attributes and assumed others are merely different types of child nodes - and now your sample doesn&#x27;t actually have the same semantic meaning as the XML example. You also removed some comments. Was all this done to emphasis how much cleaner a lisp alternative would be? If we&#x27;re playing this game, you can actually simplify the XML configuration file as well. If you attempted to capture everything that the XML does, it would make your lisp sample much more ugly.<p>Anyway, to each his own, but I think XML holds up very well and I do find it more readable and easier to work with that your lisp example.<p>I also never said XML is the best configuration format. For simple configurations a simple property file is by far the best option. For anything complicated (as in your example) XML does a great job. To contrast, JSON would fall flat on its face with this. Not to mention the fact XML parsing is typically part of the standard library of most programming language and most people are familiar with it.