David Pollak was right about XML and JSON

Interesting mismatch. You could go the other way though, right? Since JSON does have the notion of an array/list, you would always be able to convert a JSON representation into an XML representation.

No it won’t go the other way, see for example

http://stephan.reposita.org/archives/2008/04/04/rest-lean-json-and-xml-from-the-same-code/

{ items: [ 1, 2, 3] } cannot be converted to XML, because the type of “1″ etc is missing.

One would need { items: { item: [1,2,3] } } to generate XML. Which is in itself no nice JSON.

Maybe you can solve this problem by using some conventions, e.g. if the root of parent node is pretty much the same as the child node this has to be a list.
I thing those conventions are necessary to describe and support the understanding of data structures. Otherwise there is no need for XML schema ;-)

Perhaps I’m missing something in this discussion, but I think the point this problem illustrates is that you can’t do a clean conversion without the XML schema. The schema will define the “maxOccurs” attribute of the “item” element in the “items” element. If it’s greater than one or unbounded, then it can make it an array. If not, then it won’t.

@Andre: Yes thought about that, looks very fragile though.

@David: Yes, a schema is the same as “type” or a namespace like list:items – some meta information about the structure.

But when transforming XML to JSON within the browser using a schema

a.) the schema is slow, needs another request and isn’t very easy to implement
b.) is not generic, item needs to be defined. When not being generic but specific it would be easier to write a list_xml2json.xsl file

See my posting Converting Restricted XML to Good-Quality JSON for something useful that can be done, given some assumptions and some schema information.

@John: Nice post, informative, thanks

Hi EveryOne! :-D
This Post it’s very interesting and switch on a very important problem for who, like me, want some kind of light web-services-protocol… And it’s a very difficult discussion, so what follow are only ideas, may be wrong so…

i think that we must separate problem:

1] XML is extensible because one document don’t have a real semantic, i want to say that a text like this means nothing:

one
two

when i say ‘this tag means that’ every things it’s ok and this is the task of DTD
and XSD

2] Namespaces born to avoid conflict and give a way to express some kind of semantic relations…

3] XML has a DOM and this is important: it’s the description of ‘HOW’ and not ‘WHAT’
Also for this XML it’s useful… Parsing…Parsing…

4] since other points, we can try with a simulation of DOM not of XML it’s self!
But one point of attention: this is a way to make a traslation… So it’s right
to say:”there’s no simple way to traslate XML to JSON”… Preserve the value
of X of XML it’s the real problem…

{
name:’cart’,
type:ROOT,
attributes:[],
value:”
childs:[
{
name:'items',
type:NODE,
attributes:[],
value:”
childs:[
{
name:'item',
type:NODE,
attributes:[],
value:”
childs:{
name:’name’,
type:NODE,
attributes:[],
value:’one’
childs:{}
}
} ,
{
name:’item’,
type:NODE,
attributes:[],
value:”
childs:{
name:’name’,
type:NODE,
attributes:[],
value:’one’
childs:{}
}
}
]
}
]
}

Now i can generate also schema or apply schema…
About me the summary is that XML is a textual specification with XSD as meta-specification and if i have some software that use it, complexity can’t be eliminated and must percolate to JSON…
All The Best

MrZ

Hello,
I am sure completely dumb and missing something very important, but I really don’t understand the problem. To me, I would have converted

one

to at least

{ cart: { “items”: { item: { “name”: “one” } } } }

Otherwise, you are losing some information in the translation and there is no more structural equivalence between the XML and JSON.

As other people pointed out, converting a one element nested tag to a singleton list is a matter of 1) conventions or 2) typing. I think in common XML based tools I use like Ant or Maven, it is a common assumption that the pattern … denotes a collection.

Regards.

PS; thanks for your excellent articles !

@Arnaud:

“Otherwise, you are losing some information in the translation and there is no more structural equivalence between the XML and JSON.”

Yes.

There are two problems though: is the child of items an array or an object? If it depends on the number of children, this is very error prone for the client.

People don’t want to write large code in JS to access data. For example compare:

mycart = ...
mycart.cart.items.item[0].name

vs.

mycart = ....
mycart.items[0].name

Many people consider the second one more readable.