XML.orgXML.org
FOCUS AREAS |XML-DEV |XML.org DAILY NEWSLINK |REGISTRY |RESOURCES |ABOUT
OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index]
Re: [xml-dev] Is the set of languages expressible using XML asuperset of the set of languages expressible using JSON?

 Rick Jelliffe <rjelliffe@allette.com.au> wrote:
> I think XML is not a notation for transferring facts.

If you peel away enough semantic crud, you're always stuck with
something that can't do what you want it to do. And by any token, no
technology will do well in transferring "facts" as we can't even
agree on what "facts" are, or what it means to "transfer" them.

But I don't agree that XML is this simplistic thing that can't do what
we want it to do. Of course it can. Just not currently in any agreeable
form. Whether something is encoded in string or sound or small cuts on
a leaf blown by the winds over the ocean, Wittgenstein's ghost will
always make sure these kinds of discussions go on forever. That's job
security right there.

And XML isn't just strings, btw. For what is a "string"? There is
semantic goodness even in the bare bones of the cursed child of SGML,
any notation carries significance even if the interpreters can't agree
on it. Getting back to the subject a bit, XML has a much higher semantic
payload than JSON. I think that lies at the crux of this very
discussion, both pro's and con's, and that semantic payload can very well
carry higher level semantics that carries higher level semantics, it's
just that the cake is so high and the interpreters so many and the
epistemological conundrums so complex. That's why we most often
return to data and numbers and some comfortable definition of data,
wrapped in as little as possible to see if we can accomplish ...
"something", and most often something very practical "something".
This is why XML and JSON both are successful. And maybe why JSON
is becoming the next "something" is because of the lack of burden, the
lack of control, the lack of fiddly human meaning, and so let's just focus
in of data. Plain, boring data. Because the other stuff is really hard.


Cheers,

Alex

--
 Information Alchemist, tone modulator, swords master
 thinkplot.org | linkedin.com/in/shelterit | sheltered-objections.blogspot.com


[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index]


News | XML in Industry | Calendar | XML Registry
Marketplace | Resources | MyXML.org | Sponsors | Privacy Statement

Copyright 1993-2007 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS