derek denny-brown wrote:
> These questions seem to be falling into the same trap that Dare
> complained about. JSON is a simple single solution to a whole set of
> problems. It addresses cross-domain access. It is fast. It is easy
> to use. On every account, XML fares worse.
I call B.S. on this one.
> JSON is just object serialization.
And that is its flaw. JSON is a nice 80/20 solution to one problem, but
no more than that. The world is not serialized objects. XML is not
serialized objects.
> I sure hope not. I've always found the DOM a horribly awkward
> programming model. It was a valiant attempt at building an API that
> supports both text-markup XML and data-serialization XML, but the
> strain from being stretched by two very different use-cases shows.
Not really. DOM sucks but that's not at all why it sucks. The reasons
include backwards compatibility with early poorly designed browser DOMs,
a cross-platform language design that limits it to a least common
denominator, and design by committee. The need to support both
text-markup XML and data-serialization XML really doesn't factor into it.
Check out XOM or E4X sometime to see what a really clean XML object
model can look like without needing to subset the documents it can support.
--
Elliotte Rusty Harold
Java I/O 2nd Edition Just Published!
http://www.cafeaulait.org/books/javaio2/
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0596527500/ref=nosim/cafeaulaitA/
