Stop Comparing JSON and XML

Re:Stop Comparing JSON and XML by zeveb on Tuesday November 17, 2015 @05:02PM (#10584313)

It's an interesting article, but I just don't care about these supposed advantages. Sure, there's XPath, but there's also JSON Path. As for using XML to transform XML…why not just use Lisp to transform S-expressions?

JSON is hardly great: rather, it's the second-worst of the popular data interchange formats today. XML is the worst.

ASN.1 isn't really popular, which is good; I'd hate to have to decide between ASN.1 and XML.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Stop Comparing JSON and XML by henryscala on Tuesday November 17, 2015 @07:57PM (#10585185)

What about Protobuf? It seems to me it is lightweight than xml and asn.1, though heavyweight than json, but it suits most of the case.

If JSON has JSONPath and JSONSchema. It looks like it is another XML, then.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Stop Comparing JSON and XML by zeveb on Wednesday November 18, 2015 @10:40AM (#10588272)

> What about Protobuf?

For what they are, I quite like protobufs. I tend to prefer something with a human-readable version, but protobufs do get the job done.

Human-readability is why canonical S-expressions (e.g. (3:foo3:bar), which can be displayed as (foo bar), ("foo" #626172#), (|Zm9v|3:bar) or any permutation thereof) are still the best thing around.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Stop Comparing JSON and XML by znpy on Tuesday November 17, 2015 @07:28PM (#10585060)

JsonPath is no standard and last time I checked there only was a quick-and-dirty JavaScript implementation.

[ Parent | on HN ]