Re: [json] Re: JSON vs XML
- On 1/18/07, Douglas Crockford <douglas@...> wrote:
>I agree with Douglas but I think I know where the confusion lies. In
> > syntax, and nothing more. AJAX has nothing to do with JSON except
> insofar as
> > you can choose to use similar techniques using JSON instead of XML -
> but at
> > that point, it is no longer AJAX.
> It's all Ajax. Ajax is the ability to produce interactive web
> applications that do not depend exclusively on page replacement. When
> Jesse James Garrett first wrote about Ajax
> he did not include JSON in his formulation because he wasn't yet aware
> of it. He did not intend to exclude it.
"Ajax incorporates . . . data interchange and manipulation using XML
and XSLT . . ."
I think it is more functional to stop thinking of the term "Ajax" as
an acronym and just think of it like Douglas suggests or as the name
of the Greek hero.
Note "Ajax" is not all capitals in Garrett's article or for the hero.
- At 12:06 PM 1/18/2007, Martin Cooper wrote:
>Says you. But the X in AJAX stands for XML, not a variable, and the articleI hate to burst your bubble.
>you quote is very clear about that. Whether he knew about JSON at the time
>is irrelevant; there are plenty of other formats that he could have talked
>about XML, and he defined Ajax in terms of it.
Actually the "X" stands for "XMLHttpRequest" as is mentioned in one
the answers that follows the article. Did you read the Questions and
Answers after the article. There is one answer that addresses this:
>Q. Some of the Google examples you cite don't use XML at all. Do IKen
>have to use XML and/or XSLT in an Ajax application?
>A. No. XML is the most fully-developed means of getting data in and
>out of an Ajax client, but there's no reason you couldn't accomplish
>the same effects using a technology like
>similar means of structuring data for interchange.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
- On 1/18/07, Ken Robinson <kenrbnsn@...> wrote:
>From Garrett's article
> At 12:06 PM 1/18/2007, Martin Cooper wrote:
> >Says you. But the X in AJAX stands for XML, not a variable, and the article
> >you quote is very clear about that. Whether he knew about JSON at the time
> >is irrelevant; there are plenty of other formats that he could have talked
> >about XML, and he defined Ajax in terms of it.
> I hate to burst your bubble.
> Actually the "X" stands for "XMLHttpRequest" as is mentioned in one
> the answers that follows the article. Did you read the Questions and
> Answers after the article. There is one answer that addresses this:
- "I am sending some clarifications about the mail.
Before you going to discuss the JSON's power, you must know about the
technology behind it. It is nothing but AJAX."
This is factually incorrect.
That would be like saying XML is nothing but Ajax. JSON is merely a way to
serialize data-structures for inter-portability, be it storing your objects
in a Database or flat file, or sending it across-the-wire to syndicate data
between networks, platforms, languages, etc� It's just a universal way to
pass data around.
Ajax on the other hand is simply a style of writing web applications in
which structured data needs to be sent from the server back to the browser.
Although JSON is an excellent choice as a "transport layer" in
Ajaxapplications it is by no means the only choice. And of course JSON
much broader scope then just being used to pass data back to Ajax apps.
The biggest advantage of JSON over XML is that it tends to be less expensive
in terms of size and bandwidth. But XML has built in support in most
that is just my humble opinion.
In regard to JSON vs XML when it comes to Ajax: I've not seen any
benchmarking done on which is more efficient but I will have to say that in
my own un-scientific testing I have found JSON to out perform XML. This
could of course have nothing to do with JSON being faster then XML, perhaps
its just that my XMLparser on the server is slower then my JSONparser??? In
any case, since I do get a syntax/size/bandwidth advantage with JSON I feel
it's a much better choice.
My 2 cents,
On 1/16/07, shijupc123 <shijupc123@...> wrote:
> --- In firstname.lastname@example.org <json%40yahoogroups.com>, "genzoeri"
> <genzoeri@...> wrote:
> > Hii, I am newbie with json. after I read article in
> > http://www.developer.com/lang/jscript/article.php/10939_3596836_2, I
> > know that json is faster than xml. I want to know if anybody have the
> > testing script or algorithm how to prove this issue?
> > Regards,
> > Genzoeri.
> I am sending some clarifications about the mail.
> Before you going to discuss the JSON's power, you must know about the
> technology behind it. It is nothing but AJAX.
> In normal case (Ajax disabled browsers) handling response and request
> should be normal HTTP Request and HTTP Response. Also whenever you
> browse a page a new request always send to the Web server. Also the
> response will be in same manner. But in the case of Ajax enabled
> application the Number of request should be bind in an object and send
> Object Notaion).
> This is the real power behind Ajax.
> The following sites will show the examples o AJAX and JSON
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > WhenSaid Garrett in his presentations at The Ajax Experience in San
> > Jesse James Garrett first wrote about Ajax
> > [http://www.adaptivepath.com/publications/essays/archives/000385.php%5d
> > he did not include JSON in his formulation because he wasn't yet aware
> > of it. He did not intend to exclude it.
> Says you.
Francisco and at AjaxWorld in Santa Clara last year.
- I think when ajax using json as data interchange format, it's still ajax.
Understanding Code is by far the activity at which professional
developers spend most of their time ....
Is there make any sense ????
[ Genzoeri ]
- AJAX is not specific to a particular programming language, data
exchange format, or network communications. So when we use json as
data exchange format, we still call it as AJAX. Please check this out:
--- In email@example.com, genzoeri <genzoeri@...> wrote:
> I think when ajax using json as data interchange format, it's still
> Understanding Code is by far the activity at which professional
> developers spend most of their time ....
> Is there make any sense ????
> [ Genzoeri ]