 |
 |
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 >> >>