• @schnurrito@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      283 months ago

      IMHO: XML is a file format, JSON is a data transfer format. Reinventing things like RSS or SVG to use JSON wouldn’t be helpful, but using XML to communicate between your app’s frontend and backend wouldn’t be either.

        • @MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          43 months ago

          The amount of config.jsons I’ve had to mess with…

          Yeah, json is not a good config format. As much as xml is not. Please use something like YAML or TOML.

          • mrinfinity
            link
            fedilink
            73 months ago

            I never moved away from ini I’ve just been sititng back watching you all re-invent the wheel over and over and over and over and over.

            • @reinei@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              2
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              It’s a wheel, it’s supposed to turn over and over and over and infinitum!

              /S (because it’s big sarcasm instead of small.)

          • @toastal@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            13 months ago

            I wish more things used Nickel or Dhall for config. I don’t know why I wouldn’t want editor support for type information or the ability to make functions in my non-Turing-complete config to eliminate boilerplate on my end.

        • @schnurrito@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          13 months ago

          Of course you can use XML that way, but it is unnecessarily verbose and complex because you have to make decisions, like, whether to store things as attributes or as nested elements.

          I stand by my statement that if you’re saving things to a file you should probably use XML, if you’re transferring data over a network you should probably use JSON.

      • NekuSoul
        link
        fedilink
        15
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        On one hand I agree, on the other hand I just know that some people would immediately abuse it and put relevant data into comments.

          • Ephera
            link
            fedilink
            33 months ago

            I have actually seen it in an XML file in the wild. Never quite understood why they did it. Anything they encoded into there, they could have just added a node for.
            But it was an XML format that was widely used in a big company, so presumably somewhere someone wrote a shitty XML parser that can’t deal with additional nodes. Or they were just scared of touching the existing structure, I don’t know.

          • NekuSoul
            link
            fedilink
            9
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            That’s assuming people actually use a parser and don’t build their own “parser” to read values manually.

            And before anyone asks: Yes, I’ve known people who did exactly that and to this day I’m still traumatized by that discovery.

            But yes, comments would’ve been nice.

        • @thebestaquaman@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          2
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          Yes, it’s a field. Specifically, a field containing human-readable information about what is going on in adjacent fields, much like a comment. I see no issue with putting such information in a json file.

          As for “you don’t comment by putting information in variables”: In Python, your objects have the __doc__ attribute, which is specifically used for this purpose.

      • @renzev@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        173 months ago

        Please don’t. If you need something like json but with comments, then use YAML or TOML. Those formats are designed to be human-readable by default, json is better suited for interchanging information between different pieces of software. And if you really need comments inside JSON, then find a parser that supports // or /* */ syntax.

    • @leisesprecher@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      113 months ago

      And there are some truly magic tools.

      XSDs are far from perfect, but waaay more powerful than json schema.

      XSLT has its problems, but completely transforming a document to a completely different structure with just a bit of text is awesome. I had to rewrite a relatively simple XSLT in Java and it was something like 10 times more lines.

    • Caveman
      link
      fedilink
      63 months ago

      People may hate on SOAP but I’ve never had issues with setting up a SOAP client

    • Codex
      link
      fedilink
      23 months ago

      I came into the industry right when XML fever had peaked as was beginning to fall back. But in MS land, it never really went away, just being slowly cannibalize by JSON.

      You’re right though, there was some cool stuff being done with xml when it was assumed that it would be the future of all data formats. Being able to apply standard tools like XLT transforms, XSS styling, schemas to validate, and XPath to search/query and you had some very powerful generic tools.

      JSON has barely caught up to that with schemes and transforms. JQ lets you query json but I don’t really find it more readable or usable than XPath. I’m sure something like XLT exists, but there’s no standardization or attempt to rally around shared tools like with XML.

      That to me is the saddest thing. VC/MBA-backed companies have driven everyone into the worst cases of NIHS ever. Now there’s no standards, no attempts to share work or unify around reliable technology. Its every company for themselves and getting other people suckered into using (and freely maintaining) your tools as a prelude to locking them into your ecosystem is the norm now.