Re: JSON

[Pete Helgren <pete@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Agreed.  I love JSON because of it's readability and more so because of 
it's usefulness in JavaScript environments, but I had never really 
thought about using it *just* as a data transfer between 
servers/applications that weren't using JavaScript.  Nice that there is 
a tool to unwrap the data besides a JavaScript interpreter...haven't 
needed one (I wrap data into JSON on IBM i all the time to serve to 
clients but never have unwrapped).

Pete Helgren
www.petesworkshop.com
GIAC Secure Software Programmer-Java

On 9/20/2013 1:23 PM, Scott Klement wrote:
> Pete,
>
> You're right, JSON started life as a subset of JavaScript, and is widely
> used in web applications because JavaScript understands it natively.
>
> However, if you think about it, it's really a better choice than XML for
> almost anything:
>
> 1) It's less "wordy" than XML.  This translates to fewer bytes needing
> to be sent over the wire, and a smaller memory footprint to work with.
>
> 2) It's structure is simpler than XML -- and that makes it easier to
> write/support/maintain JSON parsers, and they tend to run faster, and
> have fewer bugs.
>
> 3) JSON only supports one text encoding (UTF-8).  So unlike XML, there's
> no need to try to support every possible encoding under the sun.  This
> also makes it easier to write/support/maintain JSON parsers vs. XML.
>
> I personally think JSON works better in most applications that folks are
> using XML for.   There are exceptions...  JSON doesn't have an
> equivalent of XSD or XSL, so if need that sort of functionality, XML is
> still the best choice.  But, in most business applications where things
> are a simple data interchange, I like JSON.
>
> -SK
>
>
>
> On 9/20/2013 1:11 PM, Pete Helgren wrote:
> > I find that an interesting request because unlike XML, JSON was designed
> > to be consumed by a browser or server with a JavaScript interpreter.
> > JSON represents an object in text and when rendered produces an object
> > for JavaScript to use.  Most JSON I have worked with or created has both
> > data and JavaScript functions so using it to transport data between
> > non-JavaScript capable servers is an interesting use case.