Re: XML and JSON

Walden H. Leverich wrote:

Yet, and that's the problem, the
future lies with the database...

Not sure I see the problem though. If you're using JSON between business
partners then it's more important that it be standardized. But if you're
only using JSON so simply shuttle data back and forth between server-UI
and client-UI code, then you don't really need to worry about
future-proofing the JSON.

Not only that, but there's really also nothing inherently future proof about XML. Sure, you have a document in which we both agree that a client is eight numeric digits, but when that changes to ten alpha, or 20 unicode, then XML isn't going to protect your investment any more than JSON. In fact, arguably JSON is better because it has implicit conversion routines, and so as long as both sides change, there's no need for a schema to tell us what we agree on.

Note that I'm not dissing the idea of a standardized schema. It's just that the transport mechanism doesn't do that for you; it's a higher level standard that does that. And those standards move glacially; we've had EDI standards for decades, and we still have interop issues. At the same time, I think we all have a sort of fuzzy consensus that the more standardized the request needs to be (and that typically goes up as the peers are less tightly bound), the more a schema is needed, and thus the more the inherent inefficiency of XML is offset by the standardization. But when we're talking about small packets of information, such as between UI and business logic, JSON has a definite advantage.

As always: TBTFTJ.

Joe