|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the JSON article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
|Threads older than 150 days may be archived by.|
- 1 Uneval
- 2 Removing paragraph about zip codes
- 3 JSON v XML - please stop it
- 4 On whether RFC RFC7159 Addresses "Semantics"
- 5 I-JSON
- 7 Key Uniqueness
Uneval() partialy produces JSON, I believe what ti produces is subset of JSON (don't have proof). See http://movieos.org/blog/2006/04/uneval-does-not-produce-json/ . This should be mentioned with problems and what to avoid and such. ...
Removing paragraph about zip codes
- “One potential pitfall of the free-form nature of JSON comes from the ability to write numbers as either numeric literals or quoted strings. For example, ZIP Codes in the northeastern U.S. begin with zeroes (for example, 06511 for New Haven, Connecticut). If written with quotes by one programmer but not by another, the leading zero could be dropped when exchanged between systems, when searched for within the same system, or when printed. In addition, postal codes in the U.S. are numbers but other countries use letters as well. The use of a JSON Schema (see below) should reduce this as a type of problem.”
JSON v XML - please stop it
"It is the most common data format used for asynchronous browser/server communication, largely replacing XML which is used by AJAX." is a technically misleading comment at best with no reference source at all for the claim (which even if you had one, would not be credible). Just to clarify: You send and receive JSON via AJAX and that use of XML is in no way dependent specifically on AJAX. Technically that part of the comment is just bizarre. There is also no reliable data on which to base the claim that JSON is pushing XML to extinction. I know from experience that JSON fanatics like to think so; or at least say so. Please stop it! Note instead that HTML5 is based on XML. Back-ends can create and send XML back to a browser where it can be treated directly as HTML. You're not getting a reliable or representative comparison of the comparative use just by talking to web page developers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 11:42, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
- Just reworded to: It is a very common data format used for asynchronous browser/server communication, including as a replacement for XML in some AJAX-style systems. - which I think is fair. Snori (talk) 07:48, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
On whether RFC RFC7159 Addresses "Semantics"
The only source for this claim is here: "[ECMA 404 is] extremely minimal, claims to specify only the syntax but not the semantics of JSON (I don’t understand what they mean by those words)."
But looking at the actual specifications neither ECMA 404 nor RFC 7159 mention "semantics". What the latter does add is interoperability considerations. The difference between "semantics" and "interoperability considerations" may seem like semantics, but is important for distinguishing what JSON actually is. Semantics implies that the real meaning of JSON comes from the programming language data types it can be converted to, which is not correct (JSON can have meaning even if written by one human and mailed to another).Librarian 1 (talk) 20:07, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
The WikiProject is also taking on the organization of the Wikipedia community's user script support pages. If you are interested in helping to organize information on the user scripts (or are curious about what we are up to), let us know!
Thank you. The Transhumanist 01:09, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
The article says that the keys are not required to be unique, however the standard seems to say opposite. I suggest to revise this claim and if confirmed, to explicit provide the paragraph number in the bibliography. Dgutson (talk) 13:30, 12 December 2017 (UTC)