4 ms·
when he says "use JSON where possible XML only where you have to", I thought it was funny, like developers out there are just dying to use this verbose behemoth
by jfaucett 13y ago
when he says "use JSON where possible XML only where you have to", I thought it was funny, like developers out there are just dying to use this verbose behemoth instead of its terser cousin json. But anyways, I agree with everything you're saying just wondering if there actually are any devs out there who just adore some sweet XML (seriously) ?
- veesahni 13y agoOP here. I got an email with an interesting argument on the topic. Paraphrasing: Today JSON is hip, tomorrow may be something else. By supporting XML by default and using XSLT to translate it to alternate outputs, you're able to support multiple formats without having to modify your software itself. Ofcourse, this does come with the cost of having to maintain XSLT files. To businesses that need to support multiple formats (enterprise requirements?), XML + XSLT sounds like a fair approach - it allows you to simultaneously create idiomatic XML & JSON
- dragonwriter 13y ago> By supporting XML by default and using XSLT to translate it to alternate outputs, you're able to support multiple formats without having to modify your software itself. By separating out the rendering-to-an-output format from the basic logic of the application, you get similar benefits without creating a dependency on XML handling libraries and requiring another implementation language (XSLT) for the rendering component.
- jes5199 13y agoThere's no benefit to using XSLT instead of just writing code to transform your data into another format.
- icebraining 13y agoI'm not a fan of XML, but I do like RDF, and unfortunately RDF/XML is the most common encoding format.