gert schrieb:
On Jan 26, 12:40 am, "Diez B. Roggisch" <de...@nospam.web.de> wrote:
But all of this is not JSON.
Yes it is, you just make it more python dictionary compatible :)
No, what you do is to make it more incompatible with other
json-implementations. Which defies the meaning of a standard.
Besides, {foo : "bar"} is *not* python dictionary compatible, at least
not unless you defined foo beforehand, and then there is no guarantee
that foo is actually as string containing 'foo'.
What is this json person email address so I can ask that he makes a
very small update on his site.
Go try your luck -http://www.json.org/
Besides if you can make lightweight versions of standards
http://docs.python.org/library/xml.dom.minidom.html
minidom is a lightweight version of the DOM-API. But it reads and writes
standard-conform XML documents.
The same applies for element-tree and lxml.
So it does not serve as a counter-example.
yes it does because adding ' does not mean replacing " so it will
still load standard json. Like every browser does and is exactly the
same philosofie as
No. If minidom would accept XML-documents that contain newlines in
attributes (which otherwise are forbidden), e.g.
<foo bar="some
text"/>
*that* would be like adding single-quote stringliterals to JSON.
This is about the *format*, not the API.
There are people who say something along the lines of "be strict when
writing, and tolerant when reading" (the exact quote is different, but
neither google:~site:mybrain nor any other have helped me here), so one
could argue that reading JSON that is not standard-conform would be ok.
But IMHO that would increase the amount of interoperability-problems -
because some people would *write* json that isn't standard-conform anymore.
Diez
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
