The objective of jsonx is: 1) a loss-less representation of json in xml so it can be reused with xml tools. In a sense it's the reverse of jsonml.org. jsonx is

The objective of jsonx is: 1) a loss-less representation of json in xml so it can be reused with xml tools. In a sense it's the reverse of jsonml.org. jsonx is not (neither it is meant to be): - a replacement for json - a format that enables you to query json in a xml database - a standard (I would remember if I was part of a standard comity, although I do recall playing bullshit bingo in some of these meetings) I think the use case for jsonx is extremely small: maybe exclusively related to transmitting json over the wire in hardware that is specialized for xml processing. Having worked in it I argued many times that it is not even a queryable format, which makes it less usable even in "xml world". ( for a queryable format example you can check isubiker/mljson@github ) If you are not trying to achieve 1) you can/should simply disregard jsonx. That's certainly what I do: It's completely irrelevant for me and even thought I worked on it I never used it in any of my projects. Why should I? You can't query that crap for the heck of it. About saying crap about IBM: That's just plain stupid. The fact that you can't understand something simply means you can't understand it and not that it is of no value. "all I know is that I know nothing." - Socrates, supposed to be smart guy