Infrequently Noted

Alex Russell on browsers, standards, and the process of progress.

Comments for Conference Wrap Up


:-/ This JSON thing just doesn't sound all that good to me. A stripped down data only JavaScript? What's wrong with XML? It can be streamed two ways. XMPP/Jabber has proven that. Anonymous SASL also recently got defined as a Jabber Enhancement Proposal.

You wouldn't need to go the full XMPP route though. A simple XML stream with an onStanza method would work just fine.

Though the benefits of full XMPP would be very good: prexisting servers and libraries, extensive documentation, pre-existing open standard, server-to-server communication, a couple of publish/subscribe protocols (MUC and pub/sub), and the kitchen sink.

Why define something new?

nolan - the essential gain of json is the rapid integration of data into your code. yes its the same data as would appear in an xml serialization, just integrated as a native data type.

that said, i continue to believe the development community underestimates the exploitability of javascript. you have to wonder if eval'ing a string of javascript of potentially dubious origin in your client-side code is a smart thing to do. yes i know the browser domain limitations are designed to keep this data from being "dubious", but there are well known ways around this. i suspect we will see some amusing XSS hacks via json-style data exchanges at some point.

by grumpY! at