Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Another key difference is the addressing of values. JSON has objects with a simple "key" to "value" mapping, whereas in XML addressing happens on "nodes", which all receive a unique ID via the XML processor. Additionally, the XML standard defines a common attribute xml:id, that can be used by the user, to set an ID explicitly.
A name–value pair, also called an attribute–value pair, key–value pair, or field–value pair, is a fundamental data representation in computing systems and applications. Designers often desire an open-ended data structure that allows for future extension without modifying existing code or data.
(JSON Schema Proposal, other JSON schemas/IDLs) Partial (via JSON APIs implemented with Smile backend, on Jackson, Python) — SOAP: W3C: XML: Yes W3C Recommendations: SOAP/1.1 SOAP/1.2: Partial (Efficient XML Interchange, Binary XML, Fast Infoset, MTOM, XSD base64 data) Yes Built-in id/ref, XPointer, XPath: WSDL, XML schema: DOM, SAX, XQuery ...
JSON-LD is designed around the concept of a "context" to provide additional mappings from JSON to an RDF model. The context links object properties in a JSON document to concepts in an ontology. In order to map the JSON-LD syntax to RDF, JSON-LD allows values to be coerced to a specified type or to be tagged with a language.
JSON Pointer [10] defines a string syntax for identifying a single value within a given JSON value of known structure. JSONiq [11] is a query and transformation language for JSON. XPath 3.1 [12] is an expression language that allows the processing of values conforming to the XDM [13] data model. The version 3.1 of XPath supports JSON as well as ...
Key ID A hint indicating which key the client used to generate the token signature. The server will match this value to a key on file in order to verify that the signature is valid and the token is authentic. x5c: x.509 Certificate Chain A certificate chain in RFC4945 format corresponding to the private key used to generate the token signature.
Microdata is an attempt to provide a simpler way of annotating HTML elements with machine-readable tags than the similar approaches of using RDFa and microformats. In 2013, because the W3C HTML Working Group failed to find someone to serve as an editor for the Microdata HTML specification, its development was terminated with a 'Note'.
Using lines of code to compare a 10,000-line project to a 100,000-line project is far more useful than when comparing a 20,000-line project with a 21,000-line project. While it is debatable exactly how to measure lines of code, discrepancies of an order of magnitude can be clear indicators of software complexity or man-hours.