You have now seen how XAML fits in with the rest of an app’s code and, most importantly, you now have the information needed to translate most XAML examples into a language such as C# and vice versa. However, because type converters and markup extensions are “black boxes,” a straightforward translation is not always going to be obvious.
As you proceed further, you might find that some APIs can be a little clunky from procedural code because their design is often optimized for XAML use. For example, the XAML UI Framework exposes many small building blocks to help enable rich composition, so some scenarios can involve manually creating a lot of objects. Besides the fact the XAML excels at expressing deep hierarchies of objects concisely, Microsoft spent more time implementing features to effectively hide intermediate objects in XAML (such as type converters) rather than features to hide them from procedural code (such as constructors that create inner objects on your behalf).
Most people understand the benefit of XAML’s declarative model, but some lament XML as the choice of format. The primary complaint is that it’s verbose; too verbose to type. This is true: Almost nobody enjoys typing lots of XML, but that’s where tools come in. Tools such as IntelliSense and visual designers can spare you from typing a single angle bracket! The transparent and well-specified nature of XML enables you to easily integrate new tools into the development process (creating a XAML exporter for your favorite tool, for example) and also enables easy hand-tweaking or troubleshooting.
In some areas (such as complicated paths and shapes), typing XAML by hand isn’t even practical. In fact, the trend from when XAML was first introduced in beta form has been to remove some of the handy human-typeable shortcuts in favor of a more robust and extensible format that can be supported well by tools. But I still believe that being familiar with XAML and seeing the APIs through both procedural and declarative perspectives is the best way to learn the technology. It’s like understanding how HTML works without relying on a visual tool.