[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 5:58 PM, Peter Flynn <peter@s...> wrote: On 26/06/18 17:16, Ian Graham wrote: We don't need to go to a JSON forum one because we know the answer. The argument was XML is an over-engineered solution for the development of web apps and services - JSON is simpler and better fit for that task - we don't need all the complexity and power of the XML ecosystem for that. Perfectly valid argument. Then they started applying JSON to more demanding domains that require namespacing and other complexities that are beyond the limited purview of a _javascript_ object but carried on making the same (or similar) but now fallacious arguments and no-one wants to deal with the vilification that would ensue if they were called out on it. So now presenting an alternative "for those more familiar with JSON" has entered into the lexicon as uncritical justification for contorting the semantics of a working complex data model into a syntax and representation that is not equipped to deal with it.
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] |

Cart



