-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of
Zhulei
Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2012 9:17 PM
To: [email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: Re: [paws] JSON vs XML
Hi,
I really went through e-mail discussions on this. My proposal is to use
json as data model of paws protocol issued by paws, in case that wg
addresses the trend of APIs of browser venders and keep some discovery
mechanisms open for any extra works. At the same time, we have some
problems to satisfy the needs to reuse ws schema encoded by traditional
devices, which will issue a separate wg document for xml encoding
standard for xml supporting industries.
The reasons doing this are not technical issues, just we have broad
requirements to reuse TSWS generally for communication purposes,
including smart objects, ad hoc use, browser API, wifi broadband,
cellular etc.
Best regards,
Zhu Lei
-----邮件原件-----
发件人: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
发送时间: 2012年9月14日 7:40
收件人: Zhulei; [email protected]
主题: RE: JSON vs XML
There was not much feedback on the list about the objections to the
different encodings.
We seem to agree that:
xml may not be the right choice because the current trend for APIs in
the browsers is towards json; and if we choose json, as some data
structures PAWS may reuse are encoded in xml, a json encoding for
those would need to be defined (which is not impossible, but requires
some extra work)
The latter of the two objections will not be valid when we'll send the
document to iesg, as all the encodings will have to be in place at that
time.
So we are left with practically one question: do we want to follow the
current industry trend and use json, or do we want to stick with xml.
A significant number of people prefer to specify both encodings, but
that may not be agreeable with the iesg.
This is where we stand now, deadlocked on this not critical issue.
Any suggestion on how to move forward would be appreciated.
- Gabor
From: ext Zhulei [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, September 10, 2012 12:59 AM
To: Bajko Gabor (Nokia-CIC/SiliconValley); [email protected]
Cc: Zhulei
Subject: Re: JSON vs XML
Hi,
Actually, no so much comments on this choosing. I just do not think xml
is a problem to embedded devices, in fact xml is well supported by
different sort of devices in my view. The issue may be some power and
bandwidth constrained devices (e.g. some smart objects) to support txt
based information. Let’s ignore this case since we are not to define
binary encoding at the moment.
Best regards,
Zhu Lei
发件人: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] 代表
[email protected]
发送时间: 2012年9月8日 4:41
收件人: [email protected]
主题: [paws] JSON vs XML
The chairs discussed with the AD, and we came up with the following
action plan to drive this wg to a consensus on the json vs xml
encoding:
we’ll collect an objections list for json and one for xml, listing what
is seen wrong/problematic with that encoding. The chairs and the wg
will go through that list and see if the objections are valid, then
decide which encoding has more support and choose that one. If we end
up with good objections list for both, we may choose to support both
encodings, as that list will justify the decision once the document
advances to the iesg.
I went through the emails and I found so far the following valid
objections:
xml:
too verbose, may be a problem to be supported in embedded devices
current trend for APIs in the browsers is towards json
json:
some data structures are encoded in xml, a json encoding for those
would need to be defined (which is not impossible, but requires some
extra work)
If you have additional objections, send them to the list asap.
- Gabor
_______________________________________________
paws mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/paws
