IBM are going after JSON big time with the new z/OS Connect tooling
which transforms JSON into data structures like COBOL copybooks etc.
That's all good but is JSON always the best choice when a simple text
protocol can do the same job without the bloat
https://github.com/influxdb/influxdb/pull/2696. XML is even worse.
On 17/07/2015 9:45 PM, John McKown wrote:
On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 7:57 AM, David Crayford <dcrayf...@gmail.com> wrote:
What clients do you expect to use this API? XML is old hat and being
deprecated and JSON is only useful in a language that can encode/decode
into an internal object.
I don't actually have any clients in mind. This is just for my amusement
at present. I was thinking XML simply because z/OS has System XML and IBM
has not articulated a z/OS policy for JSON. Examples of this is the COBOL
PARSE XML verb, and the use of XML in CICS. Neither COBOL nor CICS
"natively" support JSON. Also, although XML is not as popular as JSON
(thanks mainly to JavaScript), it is still a major player. What would be a
better output format? Most of my current programming is done on Linux (not
z/OS), so I'm becoming "fond" of UNIX standard output such as XML and JSON.
JSON is better but only if you are using a language that can encode/decode
in JSON seamlessly.
JSON is indeed very popular right now. And anything that I can encode in
XML can be equivalently encoded in JSON. And vice-versa. XML is "nice"
thanks to utilities such as XPATH and xslt. In fact, a person could use
xslt to transform XML into JSON rather painlessly. XML is easy to read in
Java. And it _can_ be read in JavaScript, python, ruby, and most other UNIX
scripting languages.
I appreciate the feedback. If you have a standard format that I should
consider beyond XML and JSON, I'd appreciate a pointer to the documentation
on it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
