• From: John Cowan <cowan@m...>
• To: David Lee <dlee@c...>
• Date: Tue, 3 May 2011 14:46:35 -0400

David Lee scripsit:

> XMLj is the obvious choice for a name.

I like RAJDAX (Representation of All JSON Documents As XML), as distinct
from RAXDAJ, which would be JsonML.

> plus it doesn't handle non XML character data well (say NUL's) ...

I think that's the major deficiency.  Some additional machinery is
needed to be able to escape C0 control characters (other than newlines
in string values, which can be left raw) and unpaired surrogates
represented by JSON escapes.  The obvious choice is to use JSON escapes
in the XML, at least \unnnn and \\.

-- 
John Cowan    http://www.ccil.org/~cowan   <cowan@c...>
    "Any legal document draws most of its meaning from context.  A telegram
    that says 'SELL HUNDRED THOUSAND SHARES IBM SHORT' (only 190 bits in
    5-bit Baudot code plus appropriate headers) is as good a legal document
    as any, even sans digital signature." --me

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: JSONx sent to the IETF
    • From: "David Lee" <dlee@c...>

• References:
  • JSONx sent to the IETF
    • From: Richard Salz <rsalz@u...>
  • Re: JSONx sent to the IETF
    • From: John Cowan <cowan@m...>
  • RE: JSONx sent to the IETF
    • From: "David Lee" <dlee@c...>