I'm going to have to be the red-headed stepchild that advocates XML... > -----Original Message----- > From: Mesdaq, Ali [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2008 5:19 PM > To: The elegant MVC web framework > Subject: RE: [Catalyst] implementing ajax > > Jennifer, > > Are you sure you want to stick with this route? Looks like your going > to > make a lot of work for yourself. I would hate to see the js code to > make > xml. Use the js code to just post the values you want read those values
I can't speak too much on the generation of XML on the client, but I do advocate the use of POST rather than uploading an XML body. Most of the popular JS toolkits make this quite easy. > Why would you want to use JSON? Because javascript can just read it > straight in and you can use it without having to parse anything. Your > js > would just eval the returned json content and use it. If you return xml > you will need to parse it out and just makes a lot of work. The main reason against JSON for me is security. Something that can be eval'd is very dangerous and I'm sure we're all aware of the cross-site vulnerabilities that take advantage of JSON returned data. The one thing that's always mentioned as total failsafe against it is to *not* use JSON as your returned data structure. As far as parsing the XML, that's why I use ExtJS. I can define a Store and use XPath to map Record fields to my XML data - ExtJS does the rest. It's a bit like having a Model of my data on the client side. Just my 2 cents. v/r -matt pitts _______________________________________________ List: [email protected] Listinfo: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/catalyst Searchable archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Dev site: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/
