Re: [Json] Fwd: Blog: YANG Takes Off in the Industry

[John Cowan <[e-mail]>]

Phillip Hallam-Baker scripsit:

> True, but JSON is (or certainly should be) just a serialization format
> of the DOM. So it is actually a short distance between the two points
> than XML.

I don't say that you can't construct a JSON serialization of the DOM,
but the DOM's native model, with its mixed content, node-centric rather
than path-centric naming, and other features, is far more like XML
than it is like JSON.  What JSON serializes is JavaScript values (or
rather less, given that it excludes infinity and NaN).  That makes it
convenient to represent JSON texts as anonymous JavaScript values
within a JavaScript program.

In any case this is far off-topic.

> Which is why a binary version of JSON should be a binary encoding of
> the DOM and not some different data model.

A binary version of JSON should surely encode what JSON encodes, neither
more nor less.

-- 
John Cowan          http://www.ccil.org/~cowan        [e-mail]
No man is an island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the
continent, a part of the main.  If a clod be washed away by the sea,
Europe is the less, as well as if a promontory were, as well as if a
manor of thy friends or of thine own were: any man's death diminishes me,
because I am involved in mankind, and therefore never send to know for
whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee.  --John Donne