Content deleted Content added
→HJSON: A useful compromise between JSON and YAML: Added rewritten reply, to rewritten comment. |
→HJSON: A useful compromise between JSON and YAML: Added, hopefully helpful, analogy. |
||
Line 173:
::::I agree that we shouldn’t make Wikipedia a link farm, but I also feel we should not completely ignore useful reliably sourced information. HJSON (and JSON5) are both mentioned in a [[WP:RS|reliable source]], and mentioning them in the [[JSON]] article has [[WP:NNC|a much lower bar of entry than a standalone Wikipedia article]]; as per the [[WP:LINKFARM]] concerns, I did not hotlink to the web pages (I assume our readers are smart enough to perform a Google search), but I think naming them in a single short sentence in [[JSON]] (where we already have an extensive discussion of YAML) is acceptable now that I have a reliable source which names them. 21:12, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
:::::You rewrote and replace your comment, while I was replying to it. So I had to start my reply from scratch. You seem to have understood that the arguments where flawed. My understanding is that including Hjson in this article would be wrong in regards to the article's topic, and to include it in the JSON article is giving it [[WP:WEIGHT|undue weight]]. Discussing YAML in the JSON article is completely different. YAML is a standard, it a [[serialization]] format (not a "configuration" format), it's a JSON superset, et cetera. [[Special:Contributions/185.213.154.172|185.213.154.172]] ([[User talk:185.213.154.172|talk]]) 21:20, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
:::::Continuing the Python comparison (which also answers your deleted comment): Including Hjson in a [[serialization]] format discussion, is like including Python instead of Pickle.
| |||