[HN Gopher] JSON vs. XML with Douglas Crockford
___________________________________________________________________
JSON vs. XML with Douglas Crockford
Author : ZeljkoS
Score : 6 points
Date : 2023-04-22 18:57 UTC (4 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (corecursive.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (corecursive.com)
| moritzwarhier wrote:
| Again?
|
| I'll probably listen to this at some point and genuinely like
| hearing about the origins of JSON from Crockford himself.
|
| Apart from that, I'd be surprised if this adds anything to what
| I've already heard and read ad nauseam, including from Crockford
| himself.
|
| JSON is just a nice, simple serialization format that compresses
| well and interoperates acceptly with most programming languages.
| Most importantly with the language that it was designed to be
| consumed by: Javascript.
|
| If one needs better performance or better guarantees about
| serialized data types, I guess one should use Protobuf, and/or
| ASN.1 (was that even correctly spelled?) or any of the countless
| other formats I have no clue about.
|
| If you need better schema restrictions and interconnected
| entities + circular references: use a database, I guess.
|
| At least everything XML has done in this space has more or less
| failed (e.g. SOAP). Well, failed might be too strong a word.
|
| But all the work on defining data types and schema seems almost
| independent of the underlying syntax.
|
| Since I've now spent too much time on this uninformed first
| comment, I will now listen what Douglas Crockford wants to say.
| But I think I've already read this story in another form a couple
| of years ago.
|
| JSON is really a good example of "worse is better". E.g. an
| OpenAPI spec with automated client code and TypeScript
| definitions is not much different from SOAP on the surface level.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-04-22 23:01 UTC)