4 ms·

Can anyone go into the detail of the impact ,if any, of this?

Cthulhu_ 13y ago
I'm guessing it may help bring JSON to use in the more restrictive companies that are scared of 'nonstandard' file formats. The kind that currently uses XML for everything.
- octo_t 13y ago
  the kind that correctly uses XML for everything.
  - ensignavenger 13y ago
    Why do you believe that using XML is better than JSON in every case? Or am I misinterpreting your comment?
    - sigzero 13y ago
      I took it as sarcasm. The "for everything" was the tell.
      - jlgreco 13y ago
        Poe's Law; it's impossible to tell. There are presumably some companies who think that using XML for everything is appropriate, so it stands to reason that there actually are people who believe that as well.
  - pfortuny 13y ago
    Do you know any of these?
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
ntkachov 13y ago
More of a formality than anything else. Since JSON was already defined by Javascript, formalizing it doesn't really engrave the standard, it just gives it the recognition that its not just some whacky thing created by Dave.
- Toenex 13y ago
  "Dave" being recognised as generic name for any developer.
  - devonbarrett 13y ago
    Out of interest, does anyone know the most common first name for a developer?
    - ronnier 13y ago
      Alex
      - Toenex 13y ago
        OK, could you ask Alex what the most common name for a developer is then?
l-p 13y ago
I'd be interested to know if this has any impact on the "don't be evil" clause in the JSON license.
- postfuturist 13y ago
  That's just a license for software available on json.org, so no impact at all.
  - jaredmcateer 13y ago
    Where is it on json.org? I can't seem to find it.
    - postfuturist 13y ago
      json.org/license
      - jaredmcateer 13y ago
        Thanks, I couldn't actually find a link to that page.
    - Stratoscope 13y ago
      The current versions of json.js and json2.js do not have the "evil" license clause. See my other comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6534318 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6534318

I'm guessing it may help bring JSON to use in the more restrictive companies that are scared of 'nonstandard' file formats. The kind that currently uses XML for everything.

octo_t 13y ago
the kind that correctly uses XML for everything.
- ensignavenger 13y ago
  Why do you believe that using XML is better than JSON in every case? Or am I misinterpreting your comment?
  - sigzero 13y ago
    I took it as sarcasm. The "for everything" was the tell.
    - jlgreco 13y ago
      Poe's Law; it's impossible to tell. There are presumably some companies who think that using XML for everything is appropriate, so it stands to reason that there actually are people who believe that as well.
- pfortuny 13y ago
  Do you know any of these?

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

ntkachov 13y ago

More of a formality than anything else. Since JSON was already defined by Javascript, formalizing it doesn't really engrave the standard, it just gives it the recognition that its not just some whacky thing created by Dave.

Toenex 13y ago
"Dave" being recognised as generic name for any developer.
- devonbarrett 13y ago
  Out of interest, does anyone know the most common first name for a developer?
  - ronnier 13y ago
    Alex
    - Toenex 13y ago
      OK, could you ask Alex what the most common name for a developer is then?

l-p 13y ago

I'd be interested to know if this has any impact on the "don't be evil" clause in the JSON license.

postfuturist 13y ago
That's just a license for software available on json.org, so no impact at all.
- jaredmcateer 13y ago
  Where is it on json.org? I can't seem to find it.
  - postfuturist 13y ago
    json.org/license
    - jaredmcateer 13y ago
      Thanks, I couldn't actually find a link to that page.
  - Stratoscope 13y ago
    The current versions of json.js and json2.js do not have the "evil" license clause. See my other comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6534318 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6534318