4 ms·

We had pretty much this exactly with XML and XSLT. The XML would be entirely about content/data with only suggested presentation based on linked stylesheets. Th

We had pretty much this exactly with XML and XSLT. The XML would be entirely about content/data with only suggested presentation based on linked stylesheets. The browser could use the linked stylesheets or ignore them and use its own. Since the XML would declare its schema a browser could handle pretty much any data so long as it had a handler for that schema. Since the XML could carry pretty much any sort of data server endpoints could back an "Application Web" just as easily as a "Document Web". A browser could take a music playlist and transform it into a listing of tracks via XSLT while a music player would take that exact same URL and enqueue the tracks for playback. Unfortunately the mixed presentation and content model had a lot of momentum. By the time a lot of web developers caught on to separating concerns XmlHttpRequest existed and let everyone reimplement all those cool XML/Web 2.0 ideas poorly in JavaScript.

Mandatum 6y ago
As someone who has done a lot of work in XSLT for data transformation in ESB or integration.. Honestly if I actually improved my tools a bit better, I'd almost enjoy using it. But it sucks, so damn much, in the current state.. And now nobody seems to be interested in XSLT ("XML is legacy"), I don't think I'm ever going to be interested in "fixing" it.
- ilovetux 6y ago
  This is sad because as Json seems to be taking over. Despite its terseness Json lacks a standardized way to do validation (ie xsd), transformations (ie xslt) and service definitions (ie wsdl). Its regrettable that such a vast ecosystem exists for a markup language to facilitate its use in data transfer, transformation and validation. It seems like a waste that so many working standards seem to have just been tossed away with nothing to put into their place because Json saves a few bits on the wire. Also regrettable is the fact that there seems to be resistance in developing similar standards for json.
  - kungato 6y ago
    Json is not popular because it saves bits but because it's easily readable and maps 1:1 with js objects. I've worked with xml and xslt and while I see the advantages I still prefer json for anything. Your validation should come from annotated objects on the backend anyways which should be a single source of truth and then it doesn't matter which markup format you are validating
    - ilovetux 6y ago
      I can kind of see what you're saying, but what does "annotated objects on the backend" mean. If there is not a standard I can only hack a solution together. I cannot ensure anything with 100% certainty, instead I'm left guessing if my logic is correct. With a standard, however, I can be sure that what I intend is being validated and if my logic is wrong then I can change it to match the spec.
      - dsego 6y ago
        Json schema maybe http://json-schema.org/ http://json-schema.org/
- giantrobot 6y ago
  The tooling did/does leave a lot to be desired in XML workflows. I think, in XML's heyday, it was way easier to template with PHP/ASP/JSP on the server. While those languages could have just as easily spit out XML to be transformed on the client, writing the XSL was non-trivial and lacked good tools to make the process easier. I find JSON to be a lackluster replacement for XML. The efforts to bolt on XML features (JSON Schema etc.) are half assed and not widely supported. Without a bunch of extra complication you can't really know what a value in JSON means beyond its translation to some primitive. The web development world doesn't deserve XML! /s I am a bit of an XML fanboy as it solves complicated problems in a logical way. I also bought into (and continue to believe) in a lot of Web 2.0 ideas beyond pastel colors and pseudo-reflections on logos.

Mandatum 6y ago

As someone who has done a lot of work in XSLT for data transformation in ESB or integration.. Honestly if I actually improved my tools a bit better, I'd almost enjoy using it. But it sucks, so damn much, in the current state.. And now nobody seems to be interested in XSLT ("XML is legacy"), I don't think I'm ever going to be interested in "fixing" it.

ilovetux 6y ago
This is sad because as Json seems to be taking over. Despite its terseness Json lacks a standardized way to do validation (ie xsd), transformations (ie xslt) and service definitions (ie wsdl). Its regrettable that such a vast ecosystem exists for a markup language to facilitate its use in data transfer, transformation and validation. It seems like a waste that so many working standards seem to have just been tossed away with nothing to put into their place because Json saves a few bits on the wire. Also regrettable is the fact that there seems to be resistance in developing similar standards for json.
- kungato 6y ago
  Json is not popular because it saves bits but because it's easily readable and maps 1:1 with js objects. I've worked with xml and xslt and while I see the advantages I still prefer json for anything. Your validation should come from annotated objects on the backend anyways which should be a single source of truth and then it doesn't matter which markup format you are validating
  - ilovetux 6y ago
    I can kind of see what you're saying, but what does "annotated objects on the backend" mean. If there is not a standard I can only hack a solution together. I cannot ensure anything with 100% certainty, instead I'm left guessing if my logic is correct. With a standard, however, I can be sure that what I intend is being validated and if my logic is wrong then I can change it to match the spec.
    - dsego 6y ago
      Json schema maybe http://json-schema.org/ http://json-schema.org/
giantrobot 6y ago
The tooling did/does leave a lot to be desired in XML workflows. I think, in XML's heyday, it was way easier to template with PHP/ASP/JSP on the server. While those languages could have just as easily spit out XML to be transformed on the client, writing the XSL was non-trivial and lacked good tools to make the process easier. I find JSON to be a lackluster replacement for XML. The efforts to bolt on XML features (JSON Schema etc.) are half assed and not widely supported. Without a bunch of extra complication you can't really know what a value in JSON means beyond its translation to some primitive. The web development world doesn't deserve XML! /s I am a bit of an XML fanboy as it solves complicated problems in a logical way. I also bought into (and continue to believe) in a lot of Web 2.0 ideas beyond pastel colors and pseudo-reflections on logos.