Comments on: The Case For JSON: What Is It and Why Use It? http://borkweb.com/story/the-case-for-json-what-is-it-and-why-use-it Some People Are Squirrel Handed. Thu, 12 Jan 2012 15:56:55 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Charlton http://borkweb.com/story/the-case-for-json-what-is-it-and-why-use-it/comment-page-1#comment-44854 Charlton Sat, 11 Jun 2011 05:12:16 +0000 http://borkweb.com/story/the-case-for-json-what-is-it-and-why-use-it#comment-44854 totally new and have just begun to learn html/css/js/jquery a month ago. Need to use this with html5 local storage to build a web app prototype. Great explanation. JSON does look way sexier and much more modular in grouping similar properties. totally new and have just begun to learn html/css/js/jquery a month ago. Need to use this with html5 local storage to build a web app prototype. Great explanation. JSON does look way sexier and much more modular in grouping similar properties.

]]> By: What is JSON? | John Irving Dulay http://borkweb.com/story/the-case-for-json-what-is-it-and-why-use-it/comment-page-1#comment-43721 What is JSON? | John Irving Dulay Mon, 03 May 2010 14:52:52 +0000 http://borkweb.com/story/the-case-for-json-what-is-it-and-why-use-it#comment-43721 [...] Wikipedia JSON.org The Case for JSON Share this [...] [...] Wikipedia JSON.org The Case for JSON Share this [...]

]]> By: average JOE http://borkweb.com/story/the-case-for-json-what-is-it-and-why-use-it/comment-page-1#comment-43345 average JOE Mon, 08 Feb 2010 01:13:29 +0000 http://borkweb.com/story/the-case-for-json-what-is-it-and-why-use-it#comment-43345 for me, I don't like json because it is one more thing to learn without much benefit/merit for me, I don’t like json because it is one more thing to learn without much benefit/merit

]]> By: 3 tips when using jQuery – kennethvr http://borkweb.com/story/the-case-for-json-what-is-it-and-why-use-it/comment-page-1#comment-42981 3 tips when using jQuery – kennethvr Thu, 05 Nov 2009 14:03:34 +0000 http://borkweb.com/story/the-case-for-json-what-is-it-and-why-use-it#comment-42981 [...] In our case we are using JSON as response-type from an AJAX request. This is a sort of XML but a lot easier to read, especially when you work with a lot of data. For more information on JSON visit http://json.org/ or http://borkweb.com/story/the-case-for-json-what-is-it-and-why-use-it [...] [...] In our case we are using JSON as response-type from an AJAX request. This is a sort of XML but a lot easier to read, especially when you work with a lot of data. For more information on JSON visit http://json.org/ or http://borkweb.com/story/the-case-for-json-what-is-it-and-why-use-it [...]

]]> By: Mohit http://borkweb.com/story/the-case-for-json-what-is-it-and-why-use-it/comment-page-1#comment-42949 Mohit Thu, 29 Oct 2009 13:12:48 +0000 http://borkweb.com/story/the-case-for-json-what-is-it-and-why-use-it#comment-42949 A complete beginer to json. Json is quite compact than xml. But yet XML is far better than json. Json is only good with javascript. A complete beginer to json. Json is quite compact than xml. But yet XML is far better than json. Json is only good with javascript.

]]> By: Mailman http://borkweb.com/story/the-case-for-json-what-is-it-and-why-use-it/comment-page-1#comment-41929 Mailman Wed, 01 Apr 2009 01:49:49 +0000 http://borkweb.com/story/the-case-for-json-what-is-it-and-why-use-it#comment-41929 I'm just learning JSON, and I've tried avoiding XML like the plague in general over the past 10 years developing in C, Php, ASP (JavaScript), ASP.NET (C#), ActionScript, and more. The MAIN reason is because the incredible bulkiness of XML tags in visual representation. Funny that I'm working in ColdFusion now though. LOL! Praise JSON. ;) I’m just learning JSON, and I’ve tried avoiding XML like the plague in general over the past 10 years developing in C, Php, ASP (JavaScript), ASP.NET (C#), ActionScript, and more. The MAIN reason is because the incredible bulkiness of XML tags in visual representation.

Funny that I’m working in ColdFusion now though. LOL! Praise JSON. ;)

]]> By: JSON Links | Davey's Flash Blog http://borkweb.com/story/the-case-for-json-what-is-it-and-why-use-it/comment-page-1#comment-41816 JSON Links | Davey's Flash Blog Tue, 27 Jan 2009 14:37:20 +0000 http://borkweb.com/story/the-case-for-json-what-is-it-and-why-use-it#comment-41816 [...] Matthew Batchelder gives the case to use JSON above XML. Obviously, JSON is more readable compared to XML. (Going through a large XML file is kind of a headache.) Using JSON avoids parsing XML since it is already recognized as a data structure. Thus avoiding the XML process would give the benefit of speed. [...] [...] Matthew Batchelder gives the case to use JSON above XML. Obviously, JSON is more readable compared to XML. (Going through a large XML file is kind of a headache.) Using JSON avoids parsing XML since it is already recognized as a data structure. Thus avoiding the XML process would give the benefit of speed. [...]

]]> By: 3 tips when using jQuery | devexp http://borkweb.com/story/the-case-for-json-what-is-it-and-why-use-it/comment-page-1#comment-41415 3 tips when using jQuery | devexp Sun, 12 Oct 2008 05:48:50 +0000 http://borkweb.com/story/the-case-for-json-what-is-it-and-why-use-it#comment-41415 [...] In our case we are using JSON as response-type from an AJAX request. This is a sort of XML but a lot easier to read, especially when you work with a lot of data. For more information on JSON visit http://json.org/ or http://borkweb.com/story/the-case-for-json-what-is-it-and-why-use-it [...] [...] In our case we are using JSON as response-type from an AJAX request. This is a sort of XML but a lot easier to read, especially when you work with a lot of data. For more information on JSON visit http://json.org/ or http://borkweb.com/story/the-case-for-json-what-is-it-and-why-use-it [...]

]]> By: indi http://borkweb.com/story/the-case-for-json-what-is-it-and-why-use-it/comment-page-1#comment-41127 indi Thu, 31 Jul 2008 00:18:24 +0000 http://borkweb.com/story/the-case-for-json-what-is-it-and-why-use-it#comment-41127 Json is great but I dont think its faster than xml or anything. Well it all depends on the application. Using Ajax and XML is great specially with XSLT/XPATH/XQUERY. You can do just about anything on the client side by turning xml to pdf/html (just one example) if you were to do that with JSON might have to do a little bit more coding. Json is great but I dont think its faster than xml or anything. Well it all depends on the application. Using Ajax and XML is great specially with XSLT/XPATH/XQUERY. You can do just about anything on the client side by turning xml to pdf/html (just one example) if you were to do that with JSON might have to do a little bit more coding.

]]> By: Bian http://borkweb.com/story/the-case-for-json-what-is-it-and-why-use-it/comment-page-1#comment-36953 Bian Thu, 21 Feb 2008 08:37:51 +0000 http://borkweb.com/story/the-case-for-json-what-is-it-and-why-use-it#comment-36953 I have read the post thoroughly. But as I know, even in speed, JSON is slower than XML at all. There are many posts which said json is faster. While in my check, I used C# to test them. The jayrock parser 0.8s versus microsoft's xml parser at about 0.4s. I write the xml in a complex way although. I mean the way like .... While in fact this can be simplified to . It is almost the same size or even smaller than JSON counter part. In the simplified case. The xml parser can finish the parse in 0.2s. XML is 2~4 times faster over JSON! Some one else also have tested this. See http://www.crossedconnections.org/w/index.php/2006/06/20/json-vs-xml-performance-update/ and http://dev.robertmao.com/2007/10/01/json-vs-xml-parsing-performance/. It seems no reason for JSON to survive. Even in javascript, we can use the msxml to parse xml. Msxml is much much faster than javascript json parser (either eval or else). I want to tell all that JSON is NOT fast at all. If I have read the post thoroughly. But as I know, even in speed, JSON is slower than XML at all. There are many posts which said json is faster. While in my check, I used C# to test them. The jayrock parser 0.8s versus microsoft’s xml parser at about 0.4s. I write the xml in a complex way although. I mean
the way like …. While in fact this can be simplified to . It is almost the same size or even smaller than JSON counter part. In the simplified case. The xml parser can finish the parse in 0.2s. XML is 2~4 times faster over JSON!
Some one else also have tested this. See http://www.crossedconnections.org/w/index.php/2006/06/20/json-vs-xml-performance-update/ and http://dev.robertmao.com/2007/10/01/json-vs-xml-parsing-performance/.

It seems no reason for JSON to survive. Even in javascript, we can use the msxml to parse xml. Msxml is much much faster than javascript json parser (either eval or else).

I want to tell all that JSON is NOT fast at all.

If

]]>