On 2010-05-24, at 4:55 PM, Marius Scurtescu wrote: > And to add to this, this example shows that encoding is hard, JSON > only solves decoding (in most cases, but not all).
JSON solves encoding and decoding with the same library. > > For all direct requests clients still need to encode and without a > library still need to figure what chars must be encoded. You argued this point numerous times at the in-person meeting. Clients are used to encoding and creating requests to servers. That is what they do. There are many simple ways of doing this. Clients in general do NOT decode forms data, that is done by servers, and is built into server frameworks. > Introducing JSON because dealing with form-encoded is hard does not > make much sense. As discussions last week showed (and earlier on this > list), with JSON there is also the perception that it is easy to do by > hand and that no escaping is needed. IMO that will lead to way more > problems. Libraries exit for encoding and decoding JSON. They are really easy to use. There is asymmetry in the forms data. Servers typically decode, and clients typically encode. -- Dick _______________________________________________ OAuth mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
