begin quoting boblq as of Tue, Oct 25, 2005 at 02:27:03AM -0700: > Looks good to me. It is an alternative to XML > for data exchange. > > http://www.crockford.com/JSON/xml.html > > Comments?
Looks interesting. There are a lot of examples.... hm. I should d/l a few of them and feed in garbage data, and see what sort of errors the parsers give with malformed input. Part of my problem with XML is the implementation -- they give *crap* diagnostic output on malformed input, and most often silently die when support data isn't where they expect. So you have all these nice tools that fail miserably on minor errors, and no indication that it's a minor error. What happened to the practice of writing software that produced meaningful error message? Apparently that's not as sexy as showing off how smart you are by deducing the problemw ith sheer brain power. Writing your own XML parser that tries to put out meaningful error messages is (a) seen as a waste of time as you're writing a redundant parser and (b) is apt to be buggy and error-prone itself, making it worse than what you have to deal with already. Ran across a totally different criticism of XML while looking for something else: http://www.xml.com/pub/a/w3j/s3.nelson.html -Stewart -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-lpsg
