On Friday, 27 November 2015 at 18:27:57 UTC, Chris wrote:
But JSON is widely used and chances are that people are already
familiar with it. If not, it's easy to learn, there are loads
of resources. 3rd party tools can easily parse it. And hey,
it's not that bad.
Well, many are familiar with JSON, and I use it all the time, but
it is not a good or readable format. It is just something
browsers have builtin, that's the only thing it has going for it.
XML is a lot worse as regards human readability.
I think not. It is all about familiarity and if the grammar has
been designed for it. I find my own XML _much_ more readable than
JSON. And much easier to eXtend.
If you use a decent XML editor and have a schema for the grammar
then you get a really nice generic editing solution with
auto-completion.
Here is one very real advantage of XML: the ability to embed
standard markup in descriptions and use one "container format"
for all future non-D data.
I think the animosity against XML is misguided.
But if XML is out, then YAML is a good expressive alternative
(that can be translated into XML, so you can use both if you want
to).
JSON is very limiting and not a future proof solution. People who
pick JSON for configuration, probably also pick Php for their
website. ;^)
