TechEcho

Just curious why we are still serving them as xml and not json??? Then they would basically become a REST interface, right?

I was wondering the same thing. I think it would make sense. Here are a couple of interesting pages I found:<a href="http://rssjs.org/" rel="nofollow">http://rssjs.org/</a> <a href="http://scripting.com/stories/2012/09/10/rssInJsonForReal.html" rel="nofollow">http://scripting.com/stories/2012/09/10/rssInJsonForReal.htm...</a>

The nerd in me likes this idea. But I can't see the practical use. Nevertheless, seeing the DEATH of the RSS INDUSTRY following the killing of Google Reader, a new format wouldn't feel out of place. Fresh new start and everything... :)

a) What benefit would you expect from JSON over XML justifying a new standard?b) REST does not imply JSON.c) Question marks are not pack animals.

I think its the same reason html isn't json. json wasn't as widely used when the spec was created.

Just curious why we are still serving them as xml and not json??? Then they would basically become a REST interface, right?

a) What benefit would you expect from JSON over XML justifying a new standard?b) REST does not imply JSON.c) Question marks are not pack animals.

I think its the same reason html isn't json. json wasn't as widely used when the spec was created.

Why aren't we serving rss feeds as json?

4 comments

Why aren't we serving rss feeds as json?

4 comments