Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Stephen Green scripsit: > With all this discussion of types, is it still the main motivator > behind using JSON or this XML-oriented variant of JSON > that Javascript be able to parse the data natvively (or pretty > much natively, perhaps with some pre- and/or post-processing)? Well, clearly not. But JSON is very much a language of wider communication nowadays than just browser-server. In addition, there's a convention that maps XML fragments onto pure JSON -- not Badgerfish, but another one whose silly name I forget. Each XML element becomes an object with three key-value pairs: "#name" maps to the name, "#attrs" to the attributes (as a JSON object), and "#children" to the children (as a JSON array of strings and/or objects). This, of course, is exactly the MicroXML data model. -- A: "Spiro conjectures Ex-Lax." John Cowan Q: "What does Pat Nixon frost her cakes with?" cowan@c... --"Jeopardy" for generative semanticists http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] |
