> YAML, as I see it, is trying to be to XML configurations what Markdown is to HTML
Yes, that's probably a good analogy. The big difference though is that if some Markdown fails to parse, nothing really bad happens, while a YAML file that fails to parse can bring a whole system down.
Also, Markdown is a famously ambiguous format; it trades precision for ease of write, and that's fine, mostly.
But in a configuration file, ambiguity is really the opposite of what you want.
Yes, that's probably a good analogy. The big difference though is that if some Markdown fails to parse, nothing really bad happens, while a YAML file that fails to parse can bring a whole system down.
Also, Markdown is a famously ambiguous format; it trades precision for ease of write, and that's fine, mostly.
But in a configuration file, ambiguity is really the opposite of what you want.