----- Original Message -----
From: "Julian Reschke" <julian(_dot_)reschke(_at_)gmx(_dot_)de>
To: "Carsten Bormann" <cabo(_at_)tzi(_dot_)org>
Cc: <ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
Sent: Monday, February 01, 2016 11:03 AM
On 2016-02-01 11:04, Carsten Bormann wrote:
<https://www-01.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/SS9H2Y_7.1.0/com.ibm.dp.
doc/json_jsonx.html>?
This is for the transport of JSON data in XML documents, not for
converting XML data into a JSON representation.
Ack. Good point.
JSON -> JSONx:
{ "Ticker" : "IBM" }
->
<json:object>
<json:string name="Ticker">IBM</json:string>
</json:object>
(In any case, I'm wondering if you are citing this because you think
we
should be using it or just as a vivid demonstration of how futile
these
efforts are...)
I'm not sure about the futile part; AFAIU, there are valid use cases
for
the above.
But XML->JSON of course is much more complex; if a generic
transformation is needed the result will be extremely ugly.
I wonder if you are familiar with restconf, which is NETCONF over HTTP
with the YANG data in either XML (which is what NETCONF uses for its RPC
and data therein) or in JSON. There have been a number of discussions
on how to do in JSON what has previously been done in XML and while
sometimes JSON makes it easier, other times JSON lacks the functionality
that has been used previously; I have followed (but not understood) the
discussions on JSON. The I-D is currently in WG Last Call so before too
long, it will hit this list, whereupon its ugliness, or prettiness, will
be there for all to see.
Tom Petch
Best regards, Julian