📅 Original date posted:2011-12-19
🗒️ Summary of this message: HTTP standard is sufficient, and bloating payload with JSON/XML is unnecessary. The argument for using JSON in server RPC is flawed.
📝 Original message:I agree with Luke that HTTP standard has everything necessary and bloating
payload with json/xml is not necessary.
Btw that argument "we have json in client already" seems pretty wrong,
because json in server rpc solves another problem (and solve it in wrong
way, because of data type issues, but it's another story).
slush
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 6:04 PM, Jordan Mack <jordanmack at parhelic.com>wrote:
> I thought that JSON support was fairly common these days. I personally
> prefer XML in most cases, but since JSON is already used with the RPC,
> it seemed like a natural fit here. Binary data can be base64 encoded,
> although I'm not sure why you would need to send back binary in an alias
> response.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20111219/fabde08e/attachment.html>;
slush [ARCHIVE] /
npub1ad…gl2p6
2023-06-07 02:44:42
in reply to nevent1q…wht8
Author Public Key
npub1ad7209g90jnu400x74quws0xv8gpxs2fxnjexnpwqnrxwa39exdq5gl2p6Published at
2023-06-07 02:44:42Event JSON
{
"id": "ee4ea8751bdbafa73c118d5c97ffcd83889e7ddf5686b74ba8c64589c69de330",
"pubkey": "eb7ca795057ca7cabde6f541c741e661d013414934e5934c2e04c6677625c99a",
"created_at": 1686105882,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"247922e9146ee6b54a634fc05ad7a489892c01debcd0510d008be95a47f6db80",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"84bb90b0472c7d889e37ee39313c8bb43b9f0a8c858289eafcaf31d68854892b",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"3900ae5aebfcedc10896ff09261ba18b16c6812fe8d8bea34333d56fdb4826d0"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2011-12-19\n🗒️ Summary of this message: HTTP standard is sufficient, and bloating payload with JSON/XML is unnecessary. The argument for using JSON in server RPC is flawed.\n📝 Original message:I agree with Luke that HTTP standard has everything necessary and bloating\npayload with json/xml is not necessary.\n\nBtw that argument \"we have json in client already\" seems pretty wrong,\nbecause json in server rpc solves another problem (and solve it in wrong\nway, because of data type issues, but it's another story).\n\nslush\n\nOn Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 6:04 PM, Jordan Mack \u003cjordanmack at parhelic.com\u003ewrote:\n\n\u003e I thought that JSON support was fairly common these days. I personally\n\u003e prefer XML in most cases, but since JSON is already used with the RPC,\n\u003e it seemed like a natural fit here. Binary data can be base64 encoded,\n\u003e although I'm not sure why you would need to send back binary in an alias\n\u003e response.\n\u003e\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20111219/fabde08e/attachment.html\u003e",
"sig": "6ed15b76fa59940fe0d5ca5bb5142ff5003bb755b1f1e6d741d6ed4f357898db8d21efba5286419b03d708ed3d7faa53fa3e277931bb5f2208326b11a8c6a331"
}