On 2012-04-20 17:12, Michael Thomas wrote:
...
To Paul's point about how easy it is for a server to support both, I'd
retort that it's equally easy for a client to gin up JSON instead of XML.
Pity the poor programmer who can't get their head around that gigantic
change. On the other hand, having to support XML and JSON is an ongoing
maintenance headache server-side. Why do it? There isn't even the dubious
religious war like back in the day saying that binary encoded ASN.1 was
"better/faster/stacks and cleans dishes" than "human readable" XML. XML
is just a clunky and past its prime text encoding at this point.
Requiring it
smacks of nostalgia to me.
...
What's sure is that with generalizations like these, you're not going to
convince anybody.
JSON is simpler than XML. Sometimes it's too simple.
In my experience, testing HTTP interfaces that return XML is more
pleasant as a browser will actually *display* the response (and allow it
to be transformed to HTML client-side), while it will pop up a download
dialogue for application/json. Maybe it's time to fix the latter?
Best regards, Julian
_______________________________________________
OAuth mailing list
OAuth@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
