4 ms·

JSON: The Fat-Free Alternative to XML

2 points by bootload 19y ago

jrockway 19y ago
Is the existence of JSON news?
- bootload 19y ago
  "'Is the existence of JSON news?': JSON's simple values are the same as used in programming languages. JSON's structures look like conventional programming language structures. No restructuring is necessary. JSON's object is record, struct, object, dictionary, hash, or associate array. JSON's array is array, vector, sequence, or list ..." It's not the existence that makes it worth posting. It's the why it's used. One of the questions I was wrestling with yesterday was, "Why am I thinking of using XML as a data format when all I want to do is give users access to their data?". "Do I really need to spend excessive time developing a data standard with XML schema's . Then burden my code with machinery to manipulate it?"* "Do users really want this now?". Asking these questions I realised the approach I was taking was code-calorie rich. Too rich and the better alternative is "Fat-free" JSON. Hence the inclusion. ".. The cost of adding a feature isn't just the time it takes to code it. The cost also includes the addition of an obstacle to future expansion. ... The trick is to pick the features that don't fight each other." I used to hang out on Slashdot a lot and I remember reading an interview with John Carmack back in the 90's. I can't find the references now. But the gist of it summarised in the above Carmack quote. HackerNews is what hackers find interesting. Data formats are interesting. Choose the wrong one and you may hamper yourself later on. Case in point is a new xml format that is in development. It work well. But does it need the extra 30Mb in software libs to run it? ~ http://knitml.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/knitml/knitml_core/tags/release-0.1/trunk/src/main/resources/com/knitml/core/xml/pattern-0.1.xsd?view=markup http://knitml.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/knitml/knitml_core/... When making things a lot of the time there is no one "right" choice. Just lots of little ones ~ http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/John_Carmack http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/John_Carmack
  - jwhitall 18y ago
    JSON is not a document markup language; it is a data structure interchange format. KnitML actually needs to be a document markup language. Therefore your example implying that XML was the wrong choice for KnitML is based on a lack of understanding about what the language's intent. Also, you seem to imply that an "extra 30Mb in software" has something to do with the fact that it's processing XML. That is a pretty wild assumption and is simply not true. First of all, the 30Mb is in reality too large because of a Maven bug which duplicates JAR file dependencies in a ZIP archive. The true size of the app is about 15Mb (and the upcoming release will in fact be much smaller). Secondly, JiBX is the only third-party code which does XML processing. The rest is built into the JDK. So you're really only talking 7 Mb. But it's not relevant, because you are not making a clear argument.
  - jrockway 19y ago
    Data formats are interesting, but I think everyone that reads this site has been using JSON for centuries now.
    - bootload 19y ago
      "... Data formats are interesting, but I think everyone that reads this site has been using JSON for centuries now. ..." Are you sure? The disqus guys I imagine they read this site or at least represent the readership. Well go check a disqus account and go to http://disqus.com/configure/username http://disqus.com/configure/username then http://disqus.com/migrate/username http://disqus.com/migrate/username and what do you get? Xml and Rss. So there goes that idea. I wonder if the readers on this site and/or those who use JSON use it because it's just there in their toolkits. Or do they purposefully choose it after asking why?

2 points by bootload 19y ago

jrockway 19y ago

Is the existence of JSON news?

bootload 19y ago
"'Is the existence of JSON news?': JSON's simple values are the same as used in programming languages. JSON's structures look like conventional programming language structures. No restructuring is necessary. JSON's object is record, struct, object, dictionary, hash, or associate array. JSON's array is array, vector, sequence, or list ..." It's not the existence that makes it worth posting. It's the why it's used. One of the questions I was wrestling with yesterday was, "Why am I thinking of using XML as a data format when all I want to do is give users access to their data?". "Do I really need to spend excessive time developing a data standard with XML schema's . Then burden my code with machinery to manipulate it?"* "Do users really want this now?". Asking these questions I realised the approach I was taking was code-calorie rich. Too rich and the better alternative is "Fat-free" JSON. Hence the inclusion. ".. The cost of adding a feature isn't just the time it takes to code it. The cost also includes the addition of an obstacle to future expansion. ... The trick is to pick the features that don't fight each other." I used to hang out on Slashdot a lot and I remember reading an interview with John Carmack back in the 90's. I can't find the references now. But the gist of it summarised in the above Carmack quote. HackerNews is what hackers find interesting. Data formats are interesting. Choose the wrong one and you may hamper yourself later on. Case in point is a new xml format that is in development. It work well. But does it need the extra 30Mb in software libs to run it? ~ http://knitml.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/knitml/knitml_core/tags/release-0.1/trunk/src/main/resources/com/knitml/core/xml/pattern-0.1.xsd?view=markup http://knitml.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/knitml/knitml_core/... When making things a lot of the time there is no one "right" choice. Just lots of little ones ~ http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/John_Carmack http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/John_Carmack
- jwhitall 18y ago
  JSON is not a document markup language; it is a data structure interchange format. KnitML actually needs to be a document markup language. Therefore your example implying that XML was the wrong choice for KnitML is based on a lack of understanding about what the language's intent. Also, you seem to imply that an "extra 30Mb in software" has something to do with the fact that it's processing XML. That is a pretty wild assumption and is simply not true. First of all, the 30Mb is in reality too large because of a Maven bug which duplicates JAR file dependencies in a ZIP archive. The true size of the app is about 15Mb (and the upcoming release will in fact be much smaller). Secondly, JiBX is the only third-party code which does XML processing. The rest is built into the JDK. So you're really only talking 7 Mb. But it's not relevant, because you are not making a clear argument.
- jrockway 19y ago
  Data formats are interesting, but I think everyone that reads this site has been using JSON for centuries now.
  - bootload 19y ago
    "... Data formats are interesting, but I think everyone that reads this site has been using JSON for centuries now. ..." Are you sure? The disqus guys I imagine they read this site or at least represent the readership. Well go check a disqus account and go to http://disqus.com/configure/username http://disqus.com/configure/username then http://disqus.com/migrate/username http://disqus.com/migrate/username and what do you get? Xml and Rss. So there goes that idea. I wonder if the readers on this site and/or those who use JSON use it because it's just there in their toolkits. Or do they purposefully choose it after asking why?