RE: [rest-discuss] RESTful design for Articles & Tags?
- David Sidlinger wrote:
> > The mere fact that JSON has proliferated gives credence to myActually, I would incorporate the facts of same-domain limitation of XHR and
> > assertion that XML is too hard for many people to consume
> either from a cost, time, or learning perspective.
> That's a pretty big leap. The (perceived) lower barrier to
> entry is only one of many factors in the spread of JSON. The
> same-domain limitation of XHR and the ability to "eval" JSON
> from other domains is mentioned frequently, for example.
the ability to "eval" JSON from other domains as part of (what you identify
as only a perceived) lower barrier to entry. IOW, I believe all aspects that
make JSON more appealing is certain contexts have contributed its
proliferation, not just one or a few; you couldn't even isolate those
factors if you tried.
Also, many say "perception is reality" and I think that is nowhere more true
than when a perception effects a choice. In this case if people are adopting
JSON because of a perceived lower barrier to entry then that perception in
affect becomes fact, at least for them.
> I say this as someone that has an appreciation for both JSONSorry for appearing zealous on JSON. I'd argue for XML to someone who says
> and XML and wishes that their proponents weren't quite so fanatical.
that JSON is all that is ever needed (though I doubt I'd ever argue for XSLT
these days.) It's just I hadn't found anyone here arguing for JSON's
superiority, but have had people here argue that JSON is not valuable
because of XML (or at least that was how I interpretted it.)
> META: This discussion has almost nothing to do with the originalWell there we go again... :)
> thread or REST in general. And I just added yet another message.
- Alexander Johannesen wrote
> Unless you have some special meaning with "broad", PHP4*Techinically* you are correct and thus my comments could be construed as
> indeed has good support for XML. In all my years my XML
> parsers have never found an ISP or server where this was a problem.
being misleading, but I'll still argue my premise that the XML support in
PHP4 is not all that usable or productive by quoting an article about PHP5's
XML support compared to the XML support of PHP 4:
"PHP 5 by default installs XML support and offers a new extension,
SimpleXML. ... The XML functionality that has been available through PHP in
the past has been quite rudimentary and required a fair amount of
programming work to use, so it is not uncommon to see PHP 4 applications
using XML without ever touching the xml functions.... PHP 5 also offers a
replacement extension for DOMXL (available in "experimental" form in PHP 4)
with the DOM extension. ... Both of the extensions are robust and well
thought out, and whichever suits your programming needs and taste, you will
be using a powerful extension that is light years beyond what was available
in PHP 4."