Last updated: 2026-01-23
The world of web development has undergone seismic shifts over the past decade, and XML (Extensible Markup Language) seems to have faded into the background. It's interesting to consider how a technology that once was a staple of data interchange and configuration files is now often overlooked, overshadowed by JSON and other formats. When I read the Hacker News story titled "The Lost Art of XML," it struck a chord with me-what happened to XML, and why should we care about it today?
XML was once the linchpin of data representation. I remember the early days of web services where SOAP (Simple Object Access Protocol) relied heavily on XML for its messaging framework. It was verbose, yes, but it offered a structured approach to data that appealed to many developers. The self-descriptive nature of XML made it easy to understand and manipulate, especially when dealing with complex data structures. I still have fond memories of building applications that would parse XML feeds to display dynamic content. The elegance of being able to validate XML with schemas (like DTDs and XSDs) was a game changer.
Fast forward to the rise of JSON (JavaScript Object Notation), and it became clear that XML was facing stiff competition. JSON's lightweight syntax, ease of use, and native compatibility with JavaScript made it the clear choice for modern web applications. I'll admit, I was part of the JSON fan club-especially when I had to deal with AJAX requests. The simplicity of JSON's structure made it easier for me to serialize and deserialize data. Here is a quick comparison of how data would be represented in both formats:
Despite its decline in popularity, XML still holds unique strengths that deserve recognition. One of the key features that sets XML apart is its ability to represent hierarchical data structures. This is particularly useful in industries like publishing, where formats like DocBook and DITA are still widely used for their rich capabilities in handling complex content. The flexibility of XML namespaces also allows for easier integration of multiple vocabularies, which is something I've missed when working solely with JSON.
Another area where XML shines is document-oriented applications. XSLT (eXtensible Stylesheet Language Transformations) allows for powerful transformations and is something I've utilized in content management systems. I'll never forget the project where I had to convert a large number of XML documents into HTML for a client's website. The elegance of using XSLT for this task was a testament to XML's capabilities. The transformation was seamless, and the resulting HTML was clean and well-structured. In many cases, achieving similar results with JSON would require additional libraries or manual processing.
However, it's important to acknowledge that XML is not without its challenges. One of the most common criticisms is its verbosity. The extra tags and structure can lead to larger file sizes, which can be detrimental when bandwidth is a concern. I've worked on projects where performance was critical, and I often found myself stripping down XML responses to minimize the payload size. This is a stark contrast to JSON, which, due to its lighter syntax, is often the preferred choice for APIs today.
Additionally, XML parsing can be slower compared to JSON, especially for large documents. I remember debugging an application where XML parsing became a bottleneck, leading to delayed responses in a high-traffic environment. In contrast, JSON's native support in JavaScript allows for faster parsing and manipulation, which can be crucial for responsive applications.
So, where does this leave XML today? While it may not be the go-to format for every development project, it still has a niche but essential role in certain domains. Industries such as finance, healthcare, and telecommunications continue to rely on XML due to its robust schema validation and self-descriptive nature. I've seen organizations that maintain legacy systems built on XML that are still critical to their operations, highlighting the format's durability.
Moreover, with the rise of data interoperability challenges, XML's ability to define complex data structures and its support for namespaces can no longer be ignored. In environments where different systems need to communicate seamlessly, XML can bridge gaps more effectively than JSON in some cases. This is evident in the ongoing use of XML in SOAP-based web services, which are still prevalent in enterprise applications.
Reflecting on the discussion around "The Lost Art of XML," I appreciate the nuances involved in the debate over XML versus JSON. While I have embraced JSON for its efficiency and simplicity, I recognize the value that XML continues to offer in specific contexts. As developers, we should be open to leveraging both formats, understanding their strengths and weaknesses, and choosing the right tool for the job.
In a world that often prioritizes speed and efficiency, it's easy to forget the foundational technologies that shaped the web we know today. XML may not be the star of the show anymore, but it still has a crucial role to play. As I continue my journey in tech, I'll carry forward the lessons learned from XML-its rigor, structure, and the importance of choosing the right tool for the task at hand.