×
The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.
On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 7:55 PM Jon Paris <jon.paris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
But I'm mystified. Why on earth is anybody converting the XML from/to JSON in the first place? The only possible outcome is an increase in processing time.
Well, if it were one-way, from XML to JSON only, there might be a
point. Most people find JSON easier to handle than XML, and of course
JSON is less verbose.
But Dave said this:
The company that will be sending the data already receives it in XML format
from their client and converts it to JSON that it sends to us. Then, on
receiving our JSON response, it will convert it back to XML for the client.
So, if the client sends XML, and eventually needs the response in XML,
then it sure is confusing why JSON is being introduced at all.
My only guess is that the company sitting between the client and Dave
has to do some kind of processing other than just the conversion from
XML to JSON, and *they* need to work with JSON internally. So it's for
that middle company's benefit that JSON is in the picture.
John Y.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact
[javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.
midrange.com
