Re: use of JSON instead of XML

On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 5:58 PM, Peter Flynn <peter@s...> wrote:

On 26/06/18 17:16, Ian Graham wrote:
> This has been fun!

Best we've had in weeks :-)
> But development teams aren't stupid: they think hard and pick the tools
> they believe will make them and their business successful.

Right. I just think they were initially misled into believing that XML
was a suitable format for rectangular data in the circumstances in which
they wanted it.

> To know why XML isn't picked, someone needs to talk with teams who
> made/make these decisions, and find out why XML (and associated tools)
> wasn't (and won't be) picked.
>
> An XML list is not the best forum for obtaining that answer ;-}

Nor would a JSON forum :-)

We don't need to go to a JSON forum one because we know the answer. 

The argument was  XML is an over-engineered solution for the development of web apps and services - JSON is simpler and better fit for that task - we don't need all the complexity and power of the XML ecosystem for that.

Perfectly valid argument. 

Then they started applying JSON to more demanding domains that require namespacing and other complexities that are beyond the limited purview of a _javascript_ object but carried on  making the same (or similar) but now fallacious arguments and no-one wants to deal with the vilification that would ensue if they were called out on it.

So now presenting an alternative "for those more familiar with JSON" has entered into the lexicon as uncritical justification for contorting the semantics of a working complex data model into a syntax and representation that is not equipped to deal with it.