Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: org.json.JSONML.java

Expand Messages
  • Stephen M. McKamey
    The reasoning for the URI form is that the prefix form is only an alias for the URI form. The prefix alias can be made to be anything whereas the true
    Message 1 of 18 , Jul 24, 2008
      The reasoning for the URI form is that the prefix form is only an
      alias
      for the URI form. The prefix alias can be made to be anything
      whereas
      the true namespace is the URI. Therefore to actually encode the
      entire
      namespaced tag or attribute name (without the associated namespace
      lookup context) it would need to include the full URI rather than the
      prefix.

      --- In json@yahoogroups.com, "Douglas Crockford" <douglas@...> wrote:
      >
      > --- In json@yahoogroups.com, "Mark Joseph" <mark@> wrote:
      > > The prefix, in my
      > > example is "P6R", but the prefix needs to be replaced by
      > > its matching URI. So the "P6R:tagName" in an XML
      > > processor
      > > gets replaced as "URI:tagName" since the prefix is not
      > > really important. So is that expansion done in JSONML?
      >
      > If you need that transformation, you should do the replacement
      before
      > calling JSONML. I don't understand why you would want to encode JSON
      > names with the URI form.
      >
    • Atif Aziz
      Like XML 1.0, JsonML does not need to care about namespaces. In XML 1.0, a colon (:) is a perfectly valid character in the element name. XML namespaces is
      Message 2 of 18 , Jul 24, 2008
        Like XML 1.0, JsonML does not need to care about namespaces. In XML 1.0, a colon (:) is a perfectly valid character in the element name. XML namespaces is nothing more than a standardized convention and interpretation of element and attributes names. Some XML parsers allow you to turn namespace handling on or off. Likewise, a JsonML encoder can look at XML without any regard for namespaces though the story could vary for a decoder. Here's an example. Suppose the following XML:

        <root xmlns:ns1="http://www.example.com/ns1"
        xmlns:ns2="http://www.example.com/ns2">
        <child />
        <ns1:child />
        <ns2:child />
        </root>

        In JsoML, this would become:

        [
        "root",
        {
        "xmlns:ns1": "http://www.example.com/ns1",
        "xmlns:ns2": "http://www.example.com/ns2"
        },
        ["child"],
        ["ns1:child"],
        ["ns2:child"]
        ]

        A JsonML decoder can decide to deliver the element and attribute names verbatim without any special interpretation of colon (:) in JSON object member names. If the user cares about URI + local name then he or she can put/pipe the XML delivered by the JsonML decoder through an XML parser implementation that will interpret and expose those properties. That's the approach Jayrock currently takes:

        http://svn.berlios.de/svnroot/repos/jayrock/trunk/src/Jayrock.Json/JsonML/JsonMLEncoder.cs
        http://svn.berlios.de/svnroot/repos/jayrock/trunk/src/Jayrock.Json/JsonML/JsonMLDecoder.cs

        - Atif


        From: json@yahoogroups.com [mailto:json@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Mark Joseph
        Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2008 10:08 AM
        To: json@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: Re: [json] Re: org.json.JSONML.java


        Sorry I am just not getting this. The prefix, in my
        example is "P6R", but the prefix needs to be replaced by
        its matching URI. So the "P6R:tagName" in an XML
        processor
        gets replaced as "URI:tagName" since the prefix is not
        really important. So is that expansion done in JSONML?

        Best,
        Mark

        On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 05:35:53 -0000
        "Douglas Crockford" <douglas@...> wrote:
        > --- In json@yahoogroups.com, "Mark Joseph" <mark@...>
        >wrote:
        >> Just so I understand your stuff resolves the XML
        >> namespace prefix (like "P6R:tagName") to the URI
        >> "http://www.p6r...:tagName", right? Because the URI is
        >> the real
        >> namespace name.
        >
        > It transforms <P6R:tagName> into
        >{"tagName":"P6R:tagName"} or
        > ["P6R:tagName"] and back.
        >

        -------------------------
        Mark Joseph, Ph.D.
        President and Secretary
        P6R, Inc.
        http://www.p6r.com
        408-205-0361
        Fax: 831-476-7490
        Skype: markjoseph_sc
        IM: (Yahoo) mjoseph8888
        (AIM) mjoseph8888
      • Mark Joseph
        So when I read the original email about JSONML it was so that any XML document could be encoded. And sorry without namespaces that is not going to work very
        Message 3 of 18 , Jul 25, 2008
          So when I read the original email about JSONML it was so
          that any XML document could be encoded. And sorry
          without namespaces that is not going to work very well.
          Any XML tool, and we build several, that does not support
          namespaces these days is not going to be used by anyone
          doing serious work. So I suggest that the JSON group does
          not ignore namespaces but figures out how to deal with
          them,

          Best,
          Mark
          P6R, Inc


          On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 23:22:28 +0200
          Atif Aziz <atif.aziz@...> wrote:
          > Like XML 1.0, JsonML does not need to care about
          >namespaces. In XML 1.0, a colon (:) is a perfectly valid
          >character in the element name. XML namespaces is nothing
          >more than a standardized convention and interpretation of
          >element and attributes names. Some XML parsers allow you
          >to turn namespace handling on or off. Likewise, a JsonML
          >encoder can look at XML without any regard for namespaces
          >though the story could vary for a decoder. Here's an
          >example. Suppose the following XML:
          >
          > <root xmlns:ns1="http://www.example.com/ns1"
          > xmlns:ns2="http://www.example.com/ns2">
          > <child />
          > <ns1:child />
          > <ns2:child />
          > </root>
          >
          > In JsoML, this would become:
          >
          > [
          > "root",
          > {
          > "xmlns:ns1": "http://www.example.com/ns1",
          > "xmlns:ns2": "http://www.example.com/ns2"
          > },
          > ["child"],
          > ["ns1:child"],
          > ["ns2:child"]
          > ]
          >
          > A JsonML decoder can decide to deliver the element and
          >attribute names verbatim without any special
          >interpretation of colon (:) in JSON object member names.
          >If the user cares about URI + local name then he or she
          >can put/pipe the XML delivered by the JsonML decoder
          >through an XML parser implementation that will interpret
          >and expose those properties. That's the approach Jayrock
          >currently takes:
          >
          > http://svn.berlios.de/svnroot/repos/jayrock/trunk/src/Jayrock.Json/JsonML/JsonMLEncoder.cs
          > http://svn.berlios.de/svnroot/repos/jayrock/trunk/src/Jayrock.Json/JsonML/JsonMLDecoder.cs
          >
          > - Atif
          >
          >
          >From: json@yahoogroups.com [mailto:json@yahoogroups.com]
          >On Behalf Of Mark Joseph
          > Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2008 10:08 AM
          > To: json@yahoogroups.com
          > Subject: Re: [json] Re: org.json.JSONML.java
          >
          >
          > Sorry I am just not getting this. The prefix, in my
          > example is "P6R", but the prefix needs to be replaced by
          > its matching URI. So the "P6R:tagName" in an XML
          > processor
          > gets replaced as "URI:tagName" since the prefix is not
          > really important. So is that expansion done in JSONML?
          >
          > Best,
          > Mark
          >
          > On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 05:35:53 -0000
          > "Douglas Crockford" <douglas@...> wrote:
          >> --- In json@yahoogroups.com, "Mark Joseph" <mark@...>
          >>wrote:
          >>> Just so I understand your stuff resolves the XML
          >>> namespace prefix (like "P6R:tagName") to the URI
          >>> "http://www.p6r...:tagName", right? Because the URI is
          >>> the real
          >>> namespace name.
          >>
          >> It transforms <P6R:tagName> into
          >>{"tagName":"P6R:tagName"} or
          >> ["P6R:tagName"] and back.
          >>
          >
          > -------------------------
          > Mark Joseph, Ph.D.
          > President and Secretary
          > P6R, Inc.
          > http://www.p6r.com
          > 408-205-0361
          >Fax: 831-476-7490
          > Skype: markjoseph_sc
          > IM: (Yahoo) mjoseph8888
          > (AIM) mjoseph8888
          >

          -------------------------
          Mark Joseph, Ph.D.
          President and Secretary
          P6R, Inc.
          http://www.p6r.com
          408-205-0361
          Fax: 831-476-7490
          Skype: markjoseph_sc
          IM: (Yahoo) mjoseph8888
          (AIM) mjoseph8888
        • Stephen M. McKamey
          I definitely agree. XML w/o namespaces is virtually useless these days. There is nothing about the format of JsonML that inhibits namespaces. Implementations
          Message 4 of 18 , Jul 25, 2008
            I definitely agree. XML w/o namespaces is virtually useless these
            days.

            There is nothing about the format of JsonML that inhibits
            namespaces. Implementations either need to support some storage of
            the prefix/namespace aliasing (as Atif is showing) or be able to
            resolve the namespaces and use the fully qualified node names (as
            Mark is asking for). It seems that both are valid, just as they are
            in XML.

            Ignoring or dropping namespaces is not a good idea.

            --- In json@yahoogroups.com, "Mark Joseph" <mark@...> wrote:
            >
            > So when I read the original email about JSONML it was so
            > that any XML document could be encoded. And sorry
            > without namespaces that is not going to work very well.
            > Any XML tool, and we build several, that does not support
            > namespaces these days is not going to be used by anyone
            > doing serious work. So I suggest that the JSON group does
            > not ignore namespaces but figures out how to deal with
            > them,
            >
            > Best,
            > Mark
            > P6R, Inc
            >
            >
            > On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 23:22:28 +0200
            > Atif Aziz <atif.aziz@...> wrote:
            > > Like XML 1.0, JsonML does not need to care about
            > >namespaces. In XML 1.0, a colon (:) is a perfectly valid
            > >character in the element name. XML namespaces is nothing
            > >more than a standardized convention and interpretation of
            > >element and attributes names. Some XML parsers allow you
            > >to turn namespace handling on or off. Likewise, a JsonML
            > >encoder can look at XML without any regard for namespaces
            > >though the story could vary for a decoder. Here's an
            > >example. Suppose the following XML:
            > >
            > > <root xmlns:ns1="http://www.example.com/ns1"
            > > xmlns:ns2="http://www.example.com/ns2">
            > > <child />
            > > <ns1:child />
            > > <ns2:child />
            > > </root>
            > >
            > > In JsoML, this would become:
            > >
            > > [
            > > "root",
            > > {
            > > "xmlns:ns1": "http://www.example.com/ns1",
            > > "xmlns:ns2": "http://www.example.com/ns2"
            > > },
            > > ["child"],
            > > ["ns1:child"],
            > > ["ns2:child"]
            > > ]
            > >
            > > A JsonML decoder can decide to deliver the element and
            > >attribute names verbatim without any special
            > >interpretation of colon (:) in JSON object member names.
            > >If the user cares about URI + local name then he or she
            > >can put/pipe the XML delivered by the JsonML decoder
            > >through an XML parser implementation that will interpret
            > >and expose those properties. That's the approach Jayrock
            > >currently takes:
            > >
            > >
            http://svn.berlios.de/svnroot/repos/jayrock/trunk/src/Jayrock.Json/Jso
            nML/JsonMLEncoder.cs
            > >
            http://svn.berlios.de/svnroot/repos/jayrock/trunk/src/Jayrock.Json/Jso
            nML/JsonMLDecoder.cs
            > >
            > > - Atif
            > >
            > >
            > >From: json@yahoogroups.com [mailto:json@yahoogroups.com]
            > >On Behalf Of Mark Joseph
            > > Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2008 10:08 AM
            > > To: json@yahoogroups.com
            > > Subject: Re: [json] Re: org.json.JSONML.java
            > >
            > >
            > > Sorry I am just not getting this. The prefix, in my
            > > example is "P6R", but the prefix needs to be replaced by
            > > its matching URI. So the "P6R:tagName" in an XML
            > > processor
            > > gets replaced as "URI:tagName" since the prefix is not
            > > really important. So is that expansion done in JSONML?
            > >
            > > Best,
            > > Mark
            > >
            > > On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 05:35:53 -0000
            > > "Douglas Crockford" <douglas@...> wrote:
            > >> --- In json@yahoogroups.com, "Mark Joseph" <mark@>
            > >>wrote:
            > >>> Just so I understand your stuff resolves the XML
            > >>> namespace prefix (like "P6R:tagName") to the URI
            > >>> "http://www.p6r...:tagName", right? Because the URI is
            > >>> the real
            > >>> namespace name.
            > >>
            > >> It transforms <P6R:tagName> into
            > >>{"tagName":"P6R:tagName"} or
            > >> ["P6R:tagName"] and back.
            > >>
            > >
            > > -------------------------
            > > Mark Joseph, Ph.D.
            > > President and Secretary
            > > P6R, Inc.
            > > http://www.p6r.com
            > > 408-205-0361
            > >Fax: 831-476-7490
            > > Skype: markjoseph_sc
            > > IM: (Yahoo) mjoseph8888
            > > (AIM) mjoseph8888
            > >
            >
            > -------------------------
            > Mark Joseph, Ph.D.
            > President and Secretary
            > P6R, Inc.
            > http://www.p6r.com
            > 408-205-0361
            > Fax: 831-476-7490
            > Skype: markjoseph_sc
            > IM: (Yahoo) mjoseph8888
            > (AIM) mjoseph8888
            >
          • Tatu Saloranta
            ... Me three. Most recent xml parsers have started dropping support for non-namespace documents, too, essentially considering XML Namespaces to be integral
            Message 5 of 18 , Jul 25, 2008
              On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 10:19 AM, Stephen M. McKamey <jsonml@...> wrote:
              > I definitely agree. XML w/o namespaces is virtually useless these
              > days.
              >

              Me three. Most recent xml parsers have started dropping support for
              non-namespace documents, too, essentially considering XML Namespaces
              to be integral part of core xml processing.

              Of course, I really hope that the current craze of trying to use json
              via xml tools will die soon and we will have good "native" json
              processing systems above parser/generator level; but until then
              conversions should be done properly.

              -+ Tatu +-
            • Atif Aziz
              ... An encoder can quite dumbly format an XML document into JsonML without explicitly dealing with namespaces (provided that the XML API provides access to
              Message 6 of 18 , Jul 25, 2008
                > XML w/o namespaces is virtually useless these days.
                > Ignoring or dropping namespaces is not a good idea.

                Definitely. I wasn't trying to question the merits of namespaces. My point was pretty much what you stated more clearly here:

                > There is nothing about the format of JsonML that inhibits
                > namespaces.

                An encoder can quite "dumbly" format an XML document into JsonML without explicitly dealing with namespaces (provided that the XML API provides access to the QName and does not hide so-designated namespace declarations when you enumerate over attributes) and no information would be lost. In this sense, the encoder is acting like a pass-through and simply mapping XML nodes into JSON values as per JsonML transformation rules. All that would matter is that the input XML is well-formed though not necessarily valid. This should answer the question raised earlier, "So is that expansion done in JSONML?" The expansion is not and does not need to be done in the encoded JsonML.

                A decoder implementation, on the other hand, has two API choices. Either it can directly support the abstractions introduced by XML namespaces via its API or it can delegate that work to a downstream and existing XML API. It's a detail of the implementation rather than the format.


                From: json@yahoogroups.com [mailto:json@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Stephen M. McKamey
                Sent: Friday, July 25, 2008 7:20 PM
                To: json@yahoogroups.com
                Subject: [json] Re: org.json.JSONML.java

                I definitely agree. XML w/o namespaces is virtually useless these
                days.

                There is nothing about the format of JsonML that inhibits
                namespaces. Implementations either need to support some storage of
                the prefix/namespace aliasing (as Atif is showing) or be able to
                resolve the namespaces and use the fully qualified node names (as
                Mark is asking for). It seems that both are valid, just as they are
                in XML.

                Ignoring or dropping namespaces is not a good idea.

                --- In json@yahoogroups.com, "Mark Joseph" <mark@...> wrote:
                >
                > So when I read the original email about JSONML it was so
                > that any XML document could be encoded. And sorry
                > without namespaces that is not going to work very well.
                > Any XML tool, and we build several, that does not support
                > namespaces these days is not going to be used by anyone
                > doing serious work. So I suggest that the JSON group does
                > not ignore namespaces but figures out how to deal with
                > them,
                >
                > Best,
                > Mark
                > P6R, Inc
                >
                >
                > On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 23:22:28 +0200
                > Atif Aziz <atif.aziz@...> wrote:
                > > Like XML 1.0, JsonML does not need to care about
                > >namespaces. In XML 1.0, a colon (:) is a perfectly valid
                > >character in the element name. XML namespaces is nothing
                > >more than a standardized convention and interpretation of
                > >element and attributes names. Some XML parsers allow you
                > >to turn namespace handling on or off. Likewise, a JsonML
                > >encoder can look at XML without any regard for namespaces
                > >though the story could vary for a decoder. Here's an
                > >example. Suppose the following XML:
                > >
                > > <root xmlns:ns1="http://www.example.com/ns1"
                > > xmlns:ns2="http://www.example.com/ns2">
                > > <child />
                > > <ns1:child />
                > > <ns2:child />
                > > </root>
                > >
                > > In JsoML, this would become:
                > >
                > > [
                > > "root",
                > > {
                > > "xmlns:ns1": "http://www.example.com/ns1",
                > > "xmlns:ns2": "http://www.example.com/ns2"
                > > },
                > > ["child"],
                > > ["ns1:child"],
                > > ["ns2:child"]
                > > ]
                > >
                > > A JsonML decoder can decide to deliver the element and
                > >attribute names verbatim without any special
                > >interpretation of colon (:) in JSON object member names.
                > >If the user cares about URI + local name then he or she
                > >can put/pipe the XML delivered by the JsonML decoder
                > >through an XML parser implementation that will interpret
                > >and expose those properties. That's the approach Jayrock
                > >currently takes:
                > >
                > >
                http://svn.berlios.de/svnroot/repos/jayrock/trunk/src/Jayrock.Json/Jso
                nML/JsonMLEncoder.cs
                > >
                http://svn.berlios.de/svnroot/repos/jayrock/trunk/src/Jayrock.Json/Jso
                nML/JsonMLDecoder.cs
                > >
                > > - Atif
                > >
                > >
                > >From: json@yahoogroups.com [mailto:json@yahoogroups.com]
                > >On Behalf Of Mark Joseph
                > > Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2008 10:08 AM
                > > To: json@yahoogroups.com
                > > Subject: Re: [json] Re: org.json.JSONML.java
                > >
                > >
                > > Sorry I am just not getting this. The prefix, in my
                > > example is "P6R", but the prefix needs to be replaced by
                > > its matching URI. So the "P6R:tagName" in an XML
                > > processor
                > > gets replaced as "URI:tagName" since the prefix is not
                > > really important. So is that expansion done in JSONML?
                > >
                > > Best,
                > > Mark
                > >
                > > On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 05:35:53 -0000
                > > "Douglas Crockford" <douglas@...> wrote:
                > >> --- In json@yahoogroups.com, "Mark Joseph" <mark@>
                > >>wrote:
                > >>> Just so I understand your stuff resolves the XML
                > >>> namespace prefix (like "P6R:tagName") to the URI
                > >>> "http://www.p6r...:tagName", right? Because the URI is
                > >>> the real
                > >>> namespace name.
                > >>
                > >> It transforms <P6R:tagName> into
                > >>{"tagName":"P6R:tagName"} or
                > >> ["P6R:tagName"] and back.
                > >>
                > >
                > > -------------------------
                > > Mark Joseph, Ph.D.
                > > President and Secretary
                > > P6R, Inc.
                > > http://www.p6r.com
                > > 408-205-0361
                > >Fax: 831-476-7490
                > > Skype: markjoseph_sc
                > > IM: (Yahoo) mjoseph8888
                > > (AIM) mjoseph8888
                > >
                >
                > -------------------------
                > Mark Joseph, Ph.D.
                > President and Secretary
                > P6R, Inc.
                > http://www.p6r.com
                > 408-205-0361
                > Fax: 831-476-7490
                > Skype: markjoseph_sc
                > IM: (Yahoo) mjoseph8888
                > (AIM) mjoseph8888
                >
              • Kyle Alan Hale
                I d like some clarification: the tagName/childNodes syntax is the key difference between Stephen s JSONML and my alternative, JSoda
                Message 7 of 18 , Aug 1, 2008
                  I'd like some clarification: the tagName/childNodes syntax is the key
                  difference between Stephen's JSONML and my alternative, JSoda
                  <http://jsoda.info/ <http://jsoda.info/> >. In fact, your "Object Form"
                  example is a perfect example of a JSoda object. Was this intentional,
                  or a coincidence? Intentional or not, I'd prefer that you didn't refer
                  to such syntax as JSONML, since the lack of such syntax is the sole
                  reason why I created JSoda. To my knowledge, JSoda predates this new
                  "Object Form". If that's true, I'd appreciate compliance with the JSoda
                  license: <http://jsoda.info/License <http://jsoda.info/License> >. I'll
                  eat my hat before I let JSoda be referred to as JSONML.

                  To give some background, I posted JSoda last year as an alternative to
                  JSONML. As I have been using it over the last year, I have realized
                  that JSONML has a smaller size than JSoda, and so is more fit for
                  storage or transmission. Actually, the end result of the realization
                  was that XHTML is much smaller than either, so I use it for storage of
                  DOM representations.

                  However, I still feel that JSoda's syntax is much more suited as a
                  format for a DOM builder than JSONML, because of the use of the tagName
                  and childNodes properties, leading to (in my opinion) a much more
                  intuitively nested XHTML representation.

                  Read more about how to use JSoda as a format for a DOM builder here:
                  <http://jsoda.info/Object.toDOM <http://jsoda.info/Object.toDOM> >, and
                  about JSoda syntax here: <http://jsoda.info/JSoda+is#simple
                  <http://jsoda.info/JSoda+is#simple> >.

                  --- In json@yahoogroups.com, "Douglas Crockford" <douglas@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > JsonML is an isomorphic transformation between JSON and XML. With this
                  > transformation, JSON is able to encode XML document structures. The
                  > Array Form represents a node as an array whose first slot is the
                  > tagName and second slot optionally contains an object of attributes.
                  > The remaining slots contain the node's children.
                  >
                  > So
                  >
                  > <div id="demo" class="JSONML"><p>JSONML is a transformation
                  > between<b>JSON</b>and<b>XML</b>that preserves ordering of document
                  > features.</p><p>JSONML can work with JSON arrays or JSON
                  > objects.</p><p>Three<br/>little<br/>words</p></div>
                  >
                  > is equivalent to
                  >
                  > [
                  > "div",
                  > {
                  > "class": "JSONML",
                  > "id": "demo"
                  > },
                  > [
                  > "p",
                  > "JSONML is a transformation between",
                  > [
                  > "b",
                  > "JSON"
                  > ],
                  > "and",
                  > [
                  > "b",
                  > "XML"
                  > ],
                  > "that preserves ordering of document features."
                  > ],
                  > [
                  > "p",
                  > "JSONML can work with JSON arrays or JSON objects."
                  > ],
                  > [
                  > "p",
                  > "Three",
                  > ["br"],
                  > "little",
                  > ["br"],
                  > "words"
                  > ]
                  > ]
                  >
                  > I added the Object Form to JSONML.java. It represents a node as an
                  > object. The node's attributes are the object's properties. The
                  > "tagName" property is the tagName, and the "childNodes" property is an
                  > array of objects.
                  >
                  > {
                  > "childNodes": [
                  > {
                  > "childNodes": [
                  > "JSONML is a transformation between",
                  > {
                  > "childNodes": ["JSON"],
                  > "tagName": "b"
                  > },
                  > "and",
                  > {
                  > "childNodes": ["XML"],
                  > "tagName": "b"
                  > },
                  > "that preserves ordering of document features."
                  > ],
                  > "tagName": "p"
                  > },
                  > {
                  > "childNodes":
                  > ["JSONML can work with JSON arrays or JSON objects."],
                  > "tagName": "p"
                  > },
                  > {
                  > "childNodes": [
                  > "Three",
                  > {"tagName": "br"},
                  > "little",
                  > {"tagName": "br"},
                  > "words"
                  > ],
                  > "tagName": "p"
                  > }
                  > ],
                  > "class": "JSONML",
                  > "id": "demo",
                  > "tagName": "div"
                  > }
                  >




                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • Douglas Crockford
                  ... The similarity between JSONML Object Form and JSoda is completely coincidental. Your jsoda license it limited to the use of your code. I am not using your
                  Message 8 of 18 , Aug 1, 2008
                    --- In json@yahoogroups.com, "Kyle Alan Hale" <kylealanhale@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > I'd like some clarification: the tagName/childNodes syntax is the key
                    > difference between Stephen's JSONML and my alternative, JSoda
                    > <http://jsoda.info/ <http://jsoda.info/> >. In fact, your "Object Form"
                    > example is a perfect example of a JSoda object. Was this intentional,
                    > or a coincidence? Intentional or not, I'd prefer that you didn't refer
                    > to such syntax as JSONML, since the lack of such syntax is the sole
                    > reason why I created JSoda. To my knowledge, JSoda predates this new
                    > "Object Form". If that's true, I'd appreciate compliance with the JSoda
                    > license: <http://jsoda.info/License <http://jsoda.info/License> >. I'll
                    > eat my hat before I let JSoda be referred to as JSONML.


                    The similarity between JSONML Object Form and JSoda is completely
                    coincidental.

                    Your jsoda license it limited to the use of your code. I am not using
                    your code. I have never looked at your code. If you had secured a
                    trademark on JSoda, you might be able to control the way people can
                    use the term. There is no way you can compel anyone to use your term.

                    What you do with your hat is your business.
                  • Stephen M. McKamey
                    Kyle, I think it is important to note that what we are trying to do here is foster innovation and build upon each other s ideas to produce a better set of
                    Message 9 of 18 , Aug 1, 2008
                      Kyle,

                      I think it is important to note that what we are trying to do here is
                      foster innovation and build upon each other's ideas to produce a
                      better set of tools to perform our projects and day jobs. If it is
                      just your hope to get famous by bashing others, good luck to you.
                      (However, I suggest you beware of going against Crockford!)

                      JSoda may suit your needs but it didn't meet some of the requirements
                      which went into the design of JsonML. (In fact the first couple
                      revisions of the JsonML grammar looked nearly identical.) JsonML
                      isn't limited to purely XHTML, even though it does that very well. It
                      is meant to be a round-trip-able format between valid JSON and any
                      valid XML fragment. Key considerations were two-way conversion and
                      compactness of form.

                      JsonML *wasn't* meant to be the way that everything that *could* be
                      expressed in XML *should* be expressed in JSON. This is the point
                      that I believe Crockford was stating when he started this thread.
                      Both "object form", as Crockford calls it, and JsonML ("document
                      form") are useful for different purposes. Just because you've named
                      an obvious object model doesn't necessarily mean people will jump out
                      of their seats to use it.

                      I hope that this makes the situation clearer,
                      Stephen

                      BTW, I think Noam Chomsky
                      (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chomsky_hierarchy) would have an issue
                      with your "Not a Language!"
                      (http://jsoda.info/JSoda+is#not+a+language) argument. Formal Language
                      / Automata Theory doesn't limit the use of the word "language" to mean
                      "programming language". As such, JSON and JsonML are both languages
                      with explicit grammars. Off topic, but this bugs me every time I
                      click over to your site to remind myself what JSoda is.


                      --- In json@yahoogroups.com, "Kyle Alan Hale" <kylealanhale@...> wrote:
                      >
                      > I'd like some clarification: the tagName/childNodes syntax is the key
                      > difference between Stephen's JSONML and my alternative, JSoda
                      > <http://jsoda.info/ <http://jsoda.info/> >. In fact, your "Object Form"
                      > example is a perfect example of a JSoda object. Was this intentional,
                      > or a coincidence? Intentional or not, I'd prefer that you didn't refer
                      > to such syntax as JSONML, since the lack of such syntax is the sole
                      > reason why I created JSoda. To my knowledge, JSoda predates this new
                      > "Object Form". If that's true, I'd appreciate compliance with the JSoda
                      > license: <http://jsoda.info/License <http://jsoda.info/License> >. I'll
                      > eat my hat before I let JSoda be referred to as JSONML.
                      >
                      > To give some background, I posted JSoda last year as an alternative to
                      > JSONML. As I have been using it over the last year, I have realized
                      > that JSONML has a smaller size than JSoda, and so is more fit for
                      > storage or transmission. Actually, the end result of the realization
                      > was that XHTML is much smaller than either, so I use it for storage of
                      > DOM representations.
                      >
                      > However, I still feel that JSoda's syntax is much more suited as a
                      > format for a DOM builder than JSONML, because of the use of the tagName
                      > and childNodes properties, leading to (in my opinion) a much more
                      > intuitively nested XHTML representation.
                      >
                      > Read more about how to use JSoda as a format for a DOM builder here:
                      > <http://jsoda.info/Object.toDOM <http://jsoda.info/Object.toDOM> >, and
                      > about JSoda syntax here: <http://jsoda.info/JSoda+is#simple
                      > <http://jsoda.info/JSoda+is#simple> >.
                      >
                      > --- In json@yahoogroups.com, "Douglas Crockford" <douglas@> wrote:
                      > >
                      > > JsonML is an isomorphic transformation between JSON and XML. With this
                      > > transformation, JSON is able to encode XML document structures. The
                      > > Array Form represents a node as an array whose first slot is the
                      > > tagName and second slot optionally contains an object of attributes.
                      > > The remaining slots contain the node's children.
                      > >
                      > > So
                      > >
                      > > <div id="demo" class="JSONML"><p>JSONML is a transformation
                      > > between<b>JSON</b>and<b>XML</b>that preserves ordering of document
                      > > features.</p><p>JSONML can work with JSON arrays or JSON
                      > > objects.</p><p>Three<br/>little<br/>words</p></div>
                      > >
                      > > is equivalent to
                      > >
                      > > [
                      > > "div",
                      > > {
                      > > "class": "JSONML",
                      > > "id": "demo"
                      > > },
                      > > [
                      > > "p",
                      > > "JSONML is a transformation between",
                      > > [
                      > > "b",
                      > > "JSON"
                      > > ],
                      > > "and",
                      > > [
                      > > "b",
                      > > "XML"
                      > > ],
                      > > "that preserves ordering of document features."
                      > > ],
                      > > [
                      > > "p",
                      > > "JSONML can work with JSON arrays or JSON objects."
                      > > ],
                      > > [
                      > > "p",
                      > > "Three",
                      > > ["br"],
                      > > "little",
                      > > ["br"],
                      > > "words"
                      > > ]
                      > > ]
                      > >
                      > > I added the Object Form to JSONML.java. It represents a node as an
                      > > object. The node's attributes are the object's properties. The
                      > > "tagName" property is the tagName, and the "childNodes" property is an
                      > > array of objects.
                      > >
                      > > {
                      > > "childNodes": [
                      > > {
                      > > "childNodes": [
                      > > "JSONML is a transformation between",
                      > > {
                      > > "childNodes": ["JSON"],
                      > > "tagName": "b"
                      > > },
                      > > "and",
                      > > {
                      > > "childNodes": ["XML"],
                      > > "tagName": "b"
                      > > },
                      > > "that preserves ordering of document features."
                      > > ],
                      > > "tagName": "p"
                      > > },
                      > > {
                      > > "childNodes":
                      > > ["JSONML can work with JSON arrays or JSON objects."],
                      > > "tagName": "p"
                      > > },
                      > > {
                      > > "childNodes": [
                      > > "Three",
                      > > {"tagName": "br"},
                      > > "little",
                      > > {"tagName": "br"},
                      > > "words"
                      > > ],
                      > > "tagName": "p"
                      > > }
                      > > ],
                      > > "class": "JSONML",
                      > > "id": "demo",
                      > > "tagName": "div"
                      > > }
                      > >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                      >
                    • Fang Yidong
                      Why JSoda? No way to me ... :-) ... -- JSON: Action in AJAX! JSON - http://www.json.org JSON.simple - http://www.json.org/java/simple.txt
                      Message 10 of 18 , Aug 1, 2008
                        Why JSoda? No way to me ... :-)

                        --- Douglas Crockford <douglas@...>:

                        > --- In json@yahoogroups.com, "Kyle Alan Hale"
                        > <kylealanhale@...> wrote:
                        > >
                        > > I'd like some clarification: the
                        > tagName/childNodes syntax is the key
                        > > difference between Stephen's JSONML and my
                        > alternative, JSoda
                        > > <http://jsoda.info/ <http://jsoda.info/> >. In
                        > fact, your "Object Form"
                        > > example is a perfect example of a JSoda object.
                        > Was this intentional,
                        > > or a coincidence? Intentional or not, I'd prefer
                        > that you didn't refer
                        > > to such syntax as JSONML, since the lack of such
                        > syntax is the sole
                        > > reason why I created JSoda. To my knowledge,
                        > JSoda predates this new
                        > > "Object Form". If that's true, I'd appreciate
                        > compliance with the JSoda
                        > > license: <http://jsoda.info/License
                        > <http://jsoda.info/License> >. I'll
                        > > eat my hat before I let JSoda be referred to as
                        > JSONML.
                        >
                        >
                        > The similarity between JSONML Object Form and JSoda
                        > is completely
                        > coincidental.
                        >
                        > Your jsoda license it limited to the use of your
                        > code. I am not using
                        > your code. I have never looked at your code. If you
                        > had secured a
                        > trademark on JSoda, you might be able to control the
                        > way people can
                        > use the term. There is no way you can compel anyone
                        > to use your term.
                        >
                        > What you do with your hat is your business.
                        >
                        >



                        --
                        JSON: Action in AJAX!

                        JSON - http://www.json.org
                        JSON.simple - http://www.json.org/java/simple.txt



                        ___________________________________________________________
                        雅虎邮箱,您的终生邮箱!
                        http://cn.mail.yahoo.com/
                      • Kyle Alan Hale
                        Point(s) well taken. Especially the idea of applying Chomskyan classifications to these subsets. However, some further clarifications: * I neither want to
                        Message 11 of 18 , Aug 1, 2008
                          Point(s) well taken. Especially the idea of applying Chomskyan
                          classifications to these subsets. However, some further clarifications:

                          * I neither want to "get famous" nor bash others, especially Doug. I
                          agree that we're all here to build upon each others' ideas to more
                          effectively solve our day-to-day problems.
                          * The goal of JSoda is to provide a syntax that JsonML lacks. To
                          paraphrase you: JsonML may suit your needs but it didn't meet some of
                          the requirements which went into the design of JSoda.
                          * Doug was mistaken about the terms of the licensing; it also covers
                          the documentation, which includes the syntax. As Doug made quite
                          clear, I have no real control over the use of JSoda; in fact, the
                          license clearly promotes the free use and implementation of these
                          ideas. One can't protect an idea, only a product. However, it should
                          be noted that intellectual property laws are effective whether
                          registered or not, and ignorance of pre-existing intellectual property
                          does not exempt one from those laws.

                          My only goal in responding to Doug's original post was to clarify that
                          his Object Form isn't JsonML, as your site will confirm with its
                          very clear grammar form. If it is to be an alternate syntax for
                          JsonML, then let's make it that way, officially, and I'll swallow my
                          hat. In that case, I offer a ready-to-go DOM builder for the
                          JsonML/JSoda syntax: http://jsoda.info/JSoda.toDOM

                          In the mean time, I'll update http://jsoda.info/ to reflect your point
                          on these subsets as languages, and to trim other unnecessary fluff,
                          including anything that could be construed as bashing. I like to
                          write in a fairly relaxed style, but I can see how some points on the
                          site could be misconstrued. I apologize for that.

                          --- In json@yahoogroups.com, "Stephen M. McKamey" <jsonml@...> wrote:
                          >
                          > Kyle,
                          >
                          > I think it is important to note that what we are trying to do here is
                          > foster innovation and build upon each other's ideas to produce a
                          > better set of tools to perform our projects and day jobs. If it is
                          > just your hope to get famous by bashing others, good luck to you.
                          > (However, I suggest you beware of going against Crockford!)
                          >
                          > JSoda may suit your needs but it didn't meet some of the requirements
                          > which went into the design of JsonML. (In fact the first couple
                          > revisions of the JsonML grammar looked nearly identical.) JsonML
                          > isn't limited to purely XHTML, even though it does that very well. It
                          > is meant to be a round-trip-able format between valid JSON and any
                          > valid XML fragment. Key considerations were two-way conversion and
                          > compactness of form.
                          >
                          > JsonML *wasn't* meant to be the way that everything that *could* be
                          > expressed in XML *should* be expressed in JSON. This is the point
                          > that I believe Crockford was stating when he started this thread.
                          > Both "object form", as Crockford calls it, and JsonML ("document
                          > form") are useful for different purposes. Just because you've named
                          > an obvious object model doesn't necessarily mean people will jump out
                          > of their seats to use it.
                          >
                          > I hope that this makes the situation clearer,
                          > Stephen
                          >
                          > BTW, I think Noam Chomsky
                          > (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chomsky_hierarchy) would have an issue
                          > with your "Not a Language!"
                          > (http://jsoda.info/JSoda+is#not+a+language) argument. Formal Language
                          > / Automata Theory doesn't limit the use of the word "language" to mean
                          > "programming language". As such, JSON and JsonML are both languages
                          > with explicit grammars. Off topic, but this bugs me every time I
                          > click over to your site to remind myself what JSoda is.
                          >
                          >
                          > --- In json@yahoogroups.com, "Kyle Alan Hale" <kylealanhale@> wrote:
                          > >
                          > > I'd like some clarification: the tagName/childNodes syntax is the key
                          > > difference between Stephen's JSONML and my alternative, JSoda
                          > > <http://jsoda.info/ <http://jsoda.info/> >. In fact, your "Object
                          Form"
                          > > example is a perfect example of a JSoda object. Was this intentional,
                          > > or a coincidence? Intentional or not, I'd prefer that you didn't
                          refer
                          > > to such syntax as JSONML, since the lack of such syntax is the sole
                          > > reason why I created JSoda. To my knowledge, JSoda predates this new
                          > > "Object Form". If that's true, I'd appreciate compliance with the
                          JSoda
                          > > license: <http://jsoda.info/License <http://jsoda.info/License> >.
                          I'll
                          > > eat my hat before I let JSoda be referred to as JSONML.
                          > >
                          > > To give some background, I posted JSoda last year as an alternative to
                          > > JSONML. As I have been using it over the last year, I have realized
                          > > that JSONML has a smaller size than JSoda, and so is more fit for
                          > > storage or transmission. Actually, the end result of the realization
                          > > was that XHTML is much smaller than either, so I use it for storage of
                          > > DOM representations.
                          > >
                          > > However, I still feel that JSoda's syntax is much more suited as a
                          > > format for a DOM builder than JSONML, because of the use of the
                          tagName
                          > > and childNodes properties, leading to (in my opinion) a much more
                          > > intuitively nested XHTML representation.
                          > >
                          > > Read more about how to use JSoda as a format for a DOM builder here:
                          > > <http://jsoda.info/Object.toDOM <http://jsoda.info/Object.toDOM>
                          >, and
                          > > about JSoda syntax here: <http://jsoda.info/JSoda+is#simple
                          > > <http://jsoda.info/JSoda+is#simple> >.
                          > >
                          > > --- In json@yahoogroups.com, "Douglas Crockford" <douglas@> wrote:
                          > > >
                          > > > JsonML is an isomorphic transformation between JSON and XML.
                          With this
                          > > > transformation, JSON is able to encode XML document structures. The
                          > > > Array Form represents a node as an array whose first slot is the
                          > > > tagName and second slot optionally contains an object of attributes.
                          > > > The remaining slots contain the node's children.
                          > > >
                          > > > So
                          > > >
                          > > > <div id="demo" class="JSONML"><p>JSONML is a transformation
                          > > > between<b>JSON</b>and<b>XML</b>that preserves ordering of document
                          > > > features.</p><p>JSONML can work with JSON arrays or JSON
                          > > > objects.</p><p>Three<br/>little<br/>words</p></div>
                          > > >
                          > > > is equivalent to
                          > > >
                          > > > [
                          > > > "div",
                          > > > {
                          > > > "class": "JSONML",
                          > > > "id": "demo"
                          > > > },
                          > > > [
                          > > > "p",
                          > > > "JSONML is a transformation between",
                          > > > [
                          > > > "b",
                          > > > "JSON"
                          > > > ],
                          > > > "and",
                          > > > [
                          > > > "b",
                          > > > "XML"
                          > > > ],
                          > > > "that preserves ordering of document features."
                          > > > ],
                          > > > [
                          > > > "p",
                          > > > "JSONML can work with JSON arrays or JSON objects."
                          > > > ],
                          > > > [
                          > > > "p",
                          > > > "Three",
                          > > > ["br"],
                          > > > "little",
                          > > > ["br"],
                          > > > "words"
                          > > > ]
                          > > > ]
                          > > >
                          > > > I added the Object Form to JSONML.java. It represents a node as an
                          > > > object. The node's attributes are the object's properties. The
                          > > > "tagName" property is the tagName, and the "childNodes" property
                          is an
                          > > > array of objects.
                          > > >
                          > > > {
                          > > > "childNodes": [
                          > > > {
                          > > > "childNodes": [
                          > > > "JSONML is a transformation between",
                          > > > {
                          > > > "childNodes": ["JSON"],
                          > > > "tagName": "b"
                          > > > },
                          > > > "and",
                          > > > {
                          > > > "childNodes": ["XML"],
                          > > > "tagName": "b"
                          > > > },
                          > > > "that preserves ordering of document features."
                          > > > ],
                          > > > "tagName": "p"
                          > > > },
                          > > > {
                          > > > "childNodes":
                          > > > ["JSONML can work with JSON arrays or JSON objects."],
                          > > > "tagName": "p"
                          > > > },
                          > > > {
                          > > > "childNodes": [
                          > > > "Three",
                          > > > {"tagName": "br"},
                          > > > "little",
                          > > > {"tagName": "br"},
                          > > > "words"
                          > > > ],
                          > > > "tagName": "p"
                          > > > }
                          > > > ],
                          > > > "class": "JSONML",
                          > > > "id": "demo",
                          > > > "tagName": "div"
                          > > > }
                          > > >
                          > >
                          > >
                          > >
                          > >
                          > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                          > >
                          >
                        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.