Hacker News Reader

Comment by Lazare | Hacker News Reader

Given the number of times people have invented and re-invented JSON + comments, I think it's clear there is a demand for JSON + comments, and that Crockford's view that you can solve everything by asking people to manually strip the comments out before parsing the JSON isn't viable.

View on HN

Petabytes of JSON formatted data flowing across the internet every second of every day disagree with your assessment.

And I suppose the vast amounts of XML (still!) flowing across the internet show there's no need for JSON at all, so the real mistake was even inventing JSON?

(Also, as gets pointed out every time this topic pops up on HN, including multiple times on the submission already, the main demand isn't people wanting to add comments to the JS flowing across the wire, but to config files sitting on disk. Responding to people saying "feature X would help use case Y" by noting how many people are using it for use case Z even without feature X is logically incoherent.)

Crockford (and many others) found that the many flaws inherent to XML warranted a new specification, so JSON was born. If you have an issue with JSON, go create your own spec, don’t shit all over the perfectly capable, simple, elegant specification that is JSON.

> If you have an issue with JSON, go create your own spec

And many people have. You're literally posting this in response to someone submitting the new spec they created to solve this.

I don't understand what you're trying to argue here.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com