Re:Ask HN: If you were to design the RSS today, how would yo...
by quickthrower2 on Sunday November 12, 2017 @01:52PM
(#15682009)
With good tooling unwieldy and harder to read shouldn't be an issue for a transmission format. If you need to read a raw transmission you could have a tool that presents it a JSON. I find JSON hard to read though, so it's a personal thing.
Verbose might be a real issue because it takes more bytes to send the same message. But then if you care about bytes, I think protobuf is worth considering instead of both JSON and XML.
Re:Ask HN: If you were to design the RSS today, how would yo...
by rurban on Monday November 13, 2017 @01:46AM
(#15684746)
Also slower and insecure. JSON is the defacto interop standard over the line.
Re:Ask HN: If you were to design the RSS today, how would yo...
by twobyfour on Monday November 13, 2017 @04:56AM
(#15685400)
How is JSON any more secure than XML?
And no, XML is just as much a standard (in fact, a better defined one as a formal standard), and is still very much the default in most enterprise applications. JSON being more common in startup land doesn't make XML not a standard.
I think it would be an exaggeration to say that there's anything "wrong" with XML, but there's a reason JSON has by far overtaken it outside of "enterprise" applications.
That said, in some ways XML is preferable for standards - particularly in that there's a standard way to publish a document type specification, and widely available tools for validating a document against such specifications. The somewhat experimental equivalents for JSON haven't really ever caught on.