• From: Peter Flynn <peter@s...>
• To: xml-dev@l...
• Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2018 13:39:49 +0100

On 26/06/18 01:26, Simon St.Laurent wrote:
> On 6/25/2018 5:59 PM, Peter Flynn wrote:
>>> My personal feeling is, that people would choose XML when they're
>>> developing a big software instead of a tiny one. And when good
>>> software engineering is important.
>> If this is true, then the software industry is in a worse state than we
>> imagined :-)
> 
> I don't think this is about flawed software engineering.  The JSON folks
> seem to me to be largely on the right track.

Yes, but I think categorising JSON-for-small, XML-for-big is not a
useful simplification.

[...]
> XML started out as a sleek lifeboat escaping from SGML.  Somehow we kept
> bolting on more and more.  While the results were pleasing to a certain
> crowd, XML wound up desperately top-heavy, an easy target for the
> lightweight JSON fleet.

I think what you say is absolutely true for the data-XML field, and I am
now starting to hear people saying that XML should never have been used
for rectangular data in the first place — except that it was new and
sexy at the time, and Microsoft were big enough to plug it.

In the document-XML field I think we have largely escaped the bloat, and
I'm afraid I really don't get to worry overmuch about what data-XML
(=JSON) people want to do wrt markup.

///Peter

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: use of JSON instead of XML
    • From: Michael Kay <mike@s...>

• References:
  • use of JSON instead of XML
    • From: Mukul Gandhi <gandhi.mukul@g...>
  • Re: use of JSON instead of XML
    • From: Peter Flynn <peter@s...>
  • Re: use of JSON instead of XML
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>