Tuesday, April 11th, 2006p> XML has been a solid standby in the online world for a while now, representing the true flexibility and structure that works behind the scenes of several of our favorite Web 2.0 applications. There’s a new kid on the block that’s vying for the top spot as a communication method between applications – JSON – and in this new article from AjaxWorld Magazine Daniel Markham looks extensively at the two, comparing and contrasting what they are and how they can best be used.
Itâ€™s not the latest sequel to the â€œJason versus Freddieâ€? movie, itâ€™s one of the decisions you need to make if youâ€™re rolling out a Web 2.0 product. Make the wrong choice, and your project and reputation can suffer. Make the right choice, and you can be a hero. There arenâ€™t any easy answers, but I can take you on a tour of the technology and the decisions involved so you can make a better-informed choice. During our tour I promise you wonâ€™t be attacked by a man in a hockey mask, so sit back and enjoy the ride.
He sets up to two camps of thought, drawing the lines between each side. He braks through that a little with the mention of JSON embedded inside an XML message, but it seems silly when just a JSON (or just an XML) message world do. He also mentions what he sees as the primary plus on JSON’s site – its transportation-independence. It also removes one of the restrictions that Ajax users (because of the XMLHttpRequest object) have had to work around, namely cross-domain requests. For the XML side of things, one of the main strengths he sees is the “right out of the box” nature of many Ajax toolkits and libraries out there – including Microsoft’s Atlas.
There is no real winner on this one – it basically boils down to using the right tool for the right job (again).
Posted by Chris Cornutt at 7:00 am