paul at paultomlin.com
Mon Mar 13 16:43:48 EST 2006
Eric H. Jung wrote:
> There is a non-XML option, though: JSON. I originally pursued this option for FoxyProxy but could
> not get json.js to work from the context of browser.xul.
I've very recently done some work on a website and chose JSON as the
AJAX [AJOJ?] encoding for the data. Given that most AJAX functionality
is *meant* to make the UI faster and more seamless, I think the
light-weight benefits of JSON, when compared to data in XML, shouldn't
be overlooked. It certainly worked well for us. As the author mentions
on the site, XML good for document interchange, not so good for data
You shouln't really *need* json.js to handle JSON via JS, it's just a
bit of a wrapper to try to ensure that what you're interpreting is not
doing anything (obviously) naughty/silly. Another instance of thinking
about security early on...
More information about the Project_owners