Re: [Gegl-developer] New serialization format

[Hendrik Boom <hendrik topoi pooq com>]

On Thu, Jul 05, 2012 at 06:07:22PM +0200, gfxuser wrote:
> Am 05.07.12 16:57, schrieb Michael Natterer:
> > On Thu, 2012-07-05 at 17:55 +0300, Ville Sokk wrote:
> > > GEGL needs a new serialization format. On IRC two popular choices
> > > were JSON and YAML. Fancy features are not required so both should be
> > > good choices.
> > >
> > > YAML pros:
> > > * very readable
> > >
> > > JSON pros:
> > > * pretty much every programming language has a JSON library
> > > * simpler than YAML
> > >
> > > Bat´O's YAML example: http://pastebin.com/QML9BkCb
> > > and JSON: http://pastebin.com/9ZV9y7Vz
> > >
> > > Any ideas why one should be chosen over the other? Maybe there's an
> > > even better option?
> > And XML was ruled out because it's not the latest fad any longer?
> Hi,
>
> I was also wondering why not XML. IIRC image processing in GEGL is
> internally represented by a tree (correct me if I'm wrong). Are YAML
> and JSON able to handle this, better than a native tree format like
> XML?

XML was originally a text format.  It's rather complicated to parse, 
mainly because of legacy compatibility issues.  It's bulky.  It's usable 
for word processing (as in OpenOffice) only because it's been 
compressed.

-- hendrik