From: Bill Guindon <agorilla@...>
Date: 2005-02-27T01:39:45+09:00
Subject: Re: AJAX? Why not AJYL? (Re: [OT] Ajax: A New Approach to Web Applications)

On Sun, 27 Feb 2005 00:20:59 +0900, James Britt
<jamesUNDERBARb@neurogami.com> wrote:
> Jamis Buck wrote:
> >
> It lends itself to the acronym AJYL, which is reasonably clever, but I'm
> not sure there are any advantages over using JSON.  JSON is nice because
> client code is sent serialized JavaScript objects; the deserialization
> by the client is trivial.  It would be be harder with YAML, but the YAML
> data types (I think) are more robust than what is offered in JSON.  The
> server code would have a better time handling YAML than JSON.  It would
> be AJYLR.

Or you could use JAYL and JAYLR.  Not that I'm locked into those...

-- 
Bill Guindon (aka aGorilla)