[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: James Clark: XML versus the Web

• From: rjelliffe <rjelliffe@allette.com.au>
• To: <xml-dev@lists.xml.org>
• Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2010 16:36:40 +1100

 XML v JSON

 Does it have to be either/or, in our imagination?

 What about building JSON into XML by replacing XML's attribute syntax?

 So that every XML 1.0 and every JSON document were allowed, but also:


 <?xml version="2.0"?>

 <glossary><title>example glossary</title>

   <GlossEntry
     	ID="SGML"
 	"Sort As": "SGML",
 	"Gloss Term": "Standard Generalized Markup Language",
 	"Version"=2,
 	"Acronym": "SGML",
 	"Abbrev": "ISO 8879:1986"
 	"Gloss See Also": ["GML", "XML"]
   >A meta-markup language, used to create markup languages such as 
 DocBook.</GlossEntry>

 </glossary>


 This would solve the following problems that XML has:

 1) fatty fat fat bloato burpy blubberware XML schemas just to get 
 simple typing
 2) no structured attributes
 3) attribute names cannot have spaces (or entity refs)

 and have a standard translation into JSON, so that

 Cheers
 Rick

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: James Clark: XML versus the Web
    • From: "David Lee" <dlee@calldei.com>
  • Re: James Clark: XML versus the Web
    • From: Dave Pawson <davep@dpawson.co.uk>
  • Re: James Clark: XML versus the Web
    • From: COUTHURES Alain <alain.couthures@agencexml.com>

• References:
  • James Clark: XML versus the Web
    • From: "Costello, Roger L." <costello@mitre.org>
  • Re: James Clark: XML versus the Web
    • From: Uche Ogbuji <uche@ogbuji.net>