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

Re: XML Redux

• From: Dave Pawson <davep@dpawson.co.uk>
• To: stephengreenubl@gmail.com
• Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2011 16:02:51 +0000

On Thu, 17 Feb 2011 15:26:27 +0000
Stephen Green <stephengreenubl@gmail.com> wrote:

> With all this discussion of types, is it still the main motivator
> behind using JSON or this XML-oriented variant of JSON
> that Javascript be able to parse the data natvively (or pretty
> much natively, perhaps with some pre- and/or post-processing)?
> 
> If so then surely the assumption would be that types only go
> as far as JSON's handling of types (what with Javascript
> being weakly typed).
> 
> If not then why bother with JSON if Javascript isn't the target?
> 
> ----
> Stephen D Green

Javascript constraints were never in my mind at all Stephen?
Nor Jsons. 
My starting point was Liams blog and Mikes syntax?




-- 

regards 

-- 
Dave Pawson
XSLT XSL-FO FAQ.
http://www.dpawson.co.uk

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: XML Redux
    • From: Stephen Green <stephengreenubl@gmail.com>

• References:
  • Re: XML Redux
    • From: Dave Pawson <davep@dpawson.co.uk>
  • Re: XML Redux
    • From: "Pete Cordell" <petexmldev@codalogic.com>
  • Re: XML Redux
    • From: John Cowan <cowan@mercury.ccil.org>
  • Re: XML Redux
    • From: "Pete Cordell" <petexmldev@codalogic.com>
  • Re: XML Redux
    • From: Stephen Green <stephengreenubl@gmail.com>