3 ms·
Unreadable, ambiguous and just plain ugly. First of all, in my understanding URLON is primarily made for URI fragments. No browser would send a URLON-encoded d
by drdaeman 15y ago
Unreadable, ambiguous and just plain ugly.
First of all, in my understanding URLON is primarily made for URI fragments. No browser would send a URLON-encoded data, and if you're doing AJAX, then URLs are barely a concern.
While the JSON is overly-verbose, the URLON is way too human-unfriendly:
JSON: {"table":{"achievement":{"ascending":true,"column":"instance"}}}
URLON: _table_achievement_ascending:true&column=instance
Humans suck at parsing grammars. We even suck with deeply nested parentheses (that's why editors highlight matching parens), and counting underscores is way more counter-intuitive.
Oh, and key names with underscores will look ugly.
If one'd want to be "URLish", and concise, he'd write something like
table[achievement[ascending=true&column=instance]]
While not perfect, at least, a human could understand what's going on from a first glance.