3 ms·

XML is not schemaless. It was designed to be extensible through schemas. It's in the name, after all: eXtensible Markup Language. XML also doesn't suffer the p

• dragonwriter 11y ago
  > XML is not schemaless. Yes, it is, though there are a variety of schema schemes that can be used with XML. > It was designed to be extensible through schemas. It was designed to be extensible through custom tags (in fact, all tags are custom tags); it can be optionally be restricted through the use of schemas, not extended. > XML also doesn't suffer the problems of a limited set of pre-defined types that JSON has. Yes, it does, with an even smaller number of types. (Strings, with a couple different representations.) > Its type system is extensible through schemas. No, it isn't. Its structure can be constrained through schemas (XML Schema, Relax NG, etc.), which can provide a means of modeling a different type system on top of the data structure supported by XML, but that isn't really "extending" XMLs type system any more than using a Haskell compiler to generate x86 machine code is "extending" the type system of x86 machine code; its just providing a completely separate type system on a different layer. Also, no matter how you view this, its not a distinction between XML and JSON, since you can do the same thing with JSON, and just as there are a variety of different schema standards that do this for XML, there are a variety that do the same thing for JSON.