Airtran???Newark not jfk.

Allen Jones
Director - Digital Library Programs
The New School Libraries


On May 13, 2010, at 2:00 PM, Jonathan Rochkind <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> JSON and XML as structures have 'order' in exactly analagous ways.  
> In the case of Json, if you want to encode order you should use an  
> array, not a dictionary, of course. Whether the particular software  
> _parsing_ or _translating_ either Json or XML will go through it in  
> order and preserve the order when translating to another format...  
> is another question. Is there reason to think that software dealing  
> with Json will be more likely to do this wrong than software dealing  
> with xml? I don't get it.
>
> Kyle Banerjee wrote:
>>> Huh? JSON arrays preserve element order just like XML preserves  
>>> element
>>> order.  Combining JSON labeled arrays and objects provide you with  
>>> the
>>> same mechanisms available in markup languages such as XML.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Maybe I'm getting mixed up but is it not unsafe to assume that  
>> element order
>> will be preserved in all environments in for/foreach loops where  
>> the JSON
>> might be interpreted unless you specifically iterate through  
>> elements in
>> order? If I'm wrong, this is a total nonissue. Otherwise, there  
>> could be
>> side effects.
>>
>> Don't get me wrong. JSON's a better way to go in general, and I  
>> think that
>> too much the focus on lossless preservation of the MARC record has  
>> a really
>> held us back. Given that significant portions of the MARC record  
>> are not
>> used for search, retrieval, or display, and many useful elements  
>> consist of
>> free text, faithfully preserving each field as an object to encode  
>> elements
>> such as extent of item or notes strikes me like using a chain saw  
>> to cut
>> butter.
>>
>> kyle
>>
>>