[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
Re: [xml-dev] XML vs JSON
- From: "Ghislain Fourny" <gfourny@inf.ethz.ch>
- To: Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com>
- Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2017 09:05:10 +0000
Hi Mike,
Interestingly, the XBRL community had the exact opposite epiphany: when they realized that one can tag a human-readable text (aka a fiscal report, in HTML) with context here and there (such as: this number is our company's revenue of last year in US dollars, or, this paragraph is a policy that applies in this period), they went for it. This is now known as inline XBRL (iXBRL).
It shows how both aspects (data vs. document/narrative) are important and have use cases.
Kind regards,
Ghislain
> On 21 Aug 2017, at 10:44, Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> A document-oriented XML document looks more like an HTML page with mixed content, XHTML and docbook being two prominent examples:
>>
>> <paragraph>This is <bold>bold</bold> text and this is <italic>italic</italic> text</paragraph>
>>
>
>
> I like to say that the defining characteristic of pure document-oriented XML (I sometimes call it "narrative XML") is that if you remove the markup, you are left with meaningful human-readable text.
>
> And I always felt that the reason XML became so popular was not its ability to handle pure narrative XML, but its ability to mix structured data and textual narrative in a single message. So often (consider a CV/resume) you want to handle both at the same time. XML thus brought document processing capability to the data processing masses; and by reverting to JSON, the data processing masses are saying "that's too difficult for us to cope with".
>
> Michael Kay
> Saxonica
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]