[jdom-interest] Wish-list

[Michael Kay]

But JSON and XML are not just two different syntaxes. They are 
fundamentally different data models. It's not at all clear why someone 
would want to use something as complex as the XML data model to hold 
something as simple as JSON.

Michael Kay
Saxonica

On 10/05/2012 19:22, Brad Cox wrote:
> The best reason for doing it in JDOM I know of is for the two external 
> syntaxes to share EXACTLY the same DOM tree with flawless conversion 
> between them (subject to the JDOM as XML subset notion). If that could 
> be arranged with a separate tool that would do too.
>
> FWIW: The JDOM parser I settled on is Jackson. There are a bunch of 
> others.
>
> On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 1:02 PM, Michael Kay <mike at saxonica.com 
> <mailto:mike at saxonica.com>> wrote:
>
>     There's been a lot of work on JSON-to-XML and XML-to-JSON
>     transformations. There is no single answer that works well in all
>     cases. There is a tension between being lossless and producing
>     something that is usable. An XML-to-JSON transformation that can
>     handle mixed content may produce indigestible output for simple
>     data-oriented XML.
>
>     I don't think there is any good architectural reason to regard
>     XML-JSON transformation as being part of the same component in the
>     architecture as an XML tree model. Just because it needs doing
>     doesn't mean it needs doing in JDOM. To me it's best kept separate.
>
>     Michael Kay
>     Saxonica
>
>
>     On 10/05/2012 16:43, Rolf Lear wrote:
>
>         So, searching the interweb, I see some discussion about JSON
>         parsers... I
>         don't see a SAX specific one, but there appear to be a number
>         of StAX-like
>         ones.... and we have StAX support directly now... ;-)
>
>         Loading JSON in to JDOM is probably a lot simpler than the
>         opposite
>         though....
>
>         I don't see how anything but a simple XML document could be
>         output as a
>         JSON 'output'.... the challenge would be how to deal with the
>         'unusual'
>         XML-like concepts, rather than the easy stuff?
>
>         Like, if your XML has a namespace, then what?
>
>         Rolf
>
>         On Thu, 10 May 2012 08:38:03 -0700, Chris
>         Pratt<thechrispratt at gmail.com <mailto:thechrispratt at gmail.com>>
>         wrote:
>
>             Correct me if I'm wrong, but all that JDOM would need for
>             that to work
>             would be a JSON SAX parser and a JSON Outputter.  Those
>             could even be
>             packaged in a companion jar file for those that want the
>             JDOM JSON
>
>         support.
>
>               (*Chris*)
>
>             On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 4:12 AM, Brad
>             Cox<bcox at virtualschool.edu <mailto:bcox at virtualschool.edu>>
>
>         wrote:
>
>                 This is based on experience using both, not a deep
>                 analysis. More with
>                 XML
>                 than JSON to date. This work was in the context of
>                 building XACML
>                 compilers
>                 that use the W3C DOM tree as their expression tree.
>                 And inspired by
>                 recent
>                 W3C mailing list  discussions on standardizing a JSON
>                 syntax for XACML.
>
>                 They seem to be  viewing JSON as I do, as a useful
>                 subset of XML, with
>                 lack of namespaces and attributes the main differences
>                 I can think of
>
>         at
>
>                 the moment. Lack of attributes not a problem for
>                 XACML; it hardly uses
>                 them, just element values.
>
>                 The notion is to add a JSON parser in front that
>                 builds the same XML
>                 (J)DOM tree you build now, plus a output path that
>                 converts the tree to
>                 JSON on demand. The proposed extension is appealing
>                 because it would
>                 allow
>                 the same XACML compiler to accept standard XACML
>                 and/or standard JSON,
>                 and
>                 to trivially convert between the representations.
>
>                 On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 10:24 PM, Rolf
>                 Lear<jdom at tuis.net <mailto:jdom at tuis.net>>  wrote:
>
>                     I would *love* to hear how you expect JDOM
>                     (XML-based) and JSON to
>
>         'hang
>
>                     out' in the same place .... ;-)
>
>                 --
>                 Cell: 703-594-1883 <tel:703-594-1883>
>                 Blog: http://bradjcox.blogspot.com
>                 Web: http://virtualschool.edu
>                 Manassas VA 20111
>
>
>                 _______________________________________________
>                 To control your jdom-interest membership:
>                 http://www.jdom.org/mailman/options/jdom-interest/youraddr@yourhost.com
>
>         _______________________________________________
>         To control your jdom-interest membership:
>         http://www.jdom.org/mailman/options/jdom-interest/youraddr@yourhost.com
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     To control your jdom-interest membership:
>     http://www.jdom.org/mailman/options/jdom-interest/youraddr@yourhost.com
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Cell: 703-594-1883
> Blog: http://bradjcox.blogspot.com
> Web: http://virtualschool.edu
> Manassas VA 20111
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.jdom.org/pipermail/jdom-interest/attachments/20120510/2b12dcd9/attachment.html>