2008/4/7 Ronny Pfannschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Hi, > > since json-rpc and xml-rpc basically do the same > and the only difference is the content-type (json is more concise), > i propose to create a single xml/json-rpc module. > > I did the a semilar proposal to stdlib-sig, > they told me to ask in web-sig about the details cause of json.
To repeat something I said on list a while back, this time phrased properly to correctly refer to JSON-RPC. :-) The problem with the JSON-RPC 1.0 specification was that it wasn't always as clear as could have been. As a result different server side implementations interpreted or implemented it differently, as did the JavaScript clients. I'll admit that it has been a while since I looked at it and maybe things have improved, but certainly it used to be the case that finding a JavaScript library that talked to a specific server side implementation wasn't always easy. End result was that the JavaScript library would often only work with the specific web framework it was originally designed for and nothing else. The problem areas were, different interpretations of what could be supplied in an error response. Whether an integer, string or arbitrary object should be used as the id attribute in a request. Finally, some JavaScript clients would only work with a server side implementation which provided introspection methods as they would dynamically create a JavaScript proxy object based on a call of the introspection methods. Unfortunately the JSON-RPC 1.1 draft specification didn't necessarily make things better. Rather than creating a proper layered specification which separated lower level transport and encoding concerns from higher level application concepts such as introspection they bundle it all together. Thus they try to enforce that a server must support introspection even though doing so may be totally impractical depending on what the JSON-RPC server adapter is hooking in to. They also introduced all this muck about having to support both positional and named parameters at the same time. The JSON-RPC 1.1 specification was also never really completed and left out details such as standard error codes etc that there were proposing be specified. Thus my question is, what version of the JSON-RPC specification are you intending to support? Also what form would the error response take so that it works with a suitable number of JSON-RPC clients? Are you prepared to go and test it with a sufficient range of clients to make sure Python implemented server side interops properly? Graham _______________________________________________ Web-SIG mailing list Web-SIG@python.org Web SIG: http://www.python.org/sigs/web-sig Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/web-sig/archive%40mail-archive.com
