Linked by mufasa on Mon 10th Aug 2009 12:25 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 377960
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: You're forgetting one crucial thing
by PlatformAgnostic on Wed 12th Aug 2009 00:45
in reply to "RE[2]: You're forgetting one crucial thing"
Why does that have to be the case? Even XML isn't so easy to parse, so people write reference implementations, etc. Why is a binary RPC system much worse? A human can't read it directly... but I don't really see why people are so enamored with reading data directly that is usually parsed only by machine, especially given that many folks crunch down the XML or JSON data anyway in order to transfer fewer bytes.
In my view, human-readable does not always mean 'interoperable.'




Member since:
2006-02-05
XML-RPC makes sense sense for web services because a) it goes over port 80, which means less firewall headaches, and b) it is xml, which is designed to be parsable by anyone (including humans)
JSON makes sense because XML is incredibly verbose, and if you are communicating back and forth with javascript anyways you may as well be using its native object notation anyways. It still uses text, again, because you want it to work with web servers.
Binary RPC calls make sense when you control both the client and the server, and performance outweighs interoperability.