Remove JSON support from System.BinaryData, or pull it entirely #68887
-
This seems like a pretty strong layering violation to me. The JSON is not a future-proof format. XML seemed like the clear and eternal winner, and now is regarded a legacy format. JSON is not a really great format. It does its job alright. It is conceivable, though, that 10 years from now we will use something else. The design document acknowledges:
As designed, this type seems to live at a layer above the framework. It should be, perhaps, in the .NET web stack but not in the base class library. Also, I have to say that I would not recommend using this type for anything. I'd recommend performing the appropriate conversion between data formats directly. This new type is highly opinionated and specialized. I believe this type does not carry its weight and should be pulled entirely, or at least JSON support should be removed. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Replies: 1 comment 2 replies
-
The video (see #41686 (comment)) discusses this at length, since the "JSON isn't a future proof file format and isn't always the appropriate selection" concern is shared by many of the people who reviewed the API. The customer who wanted BinaryData also required JSON serialization support as a first class concept. The tight coupling is one of the reasons this type does not ship as part of the BCL and is a fully out of band package. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
The video (see #41686 (comment)) discusses this at length, since the "JSON isn't a future proof file format and isn't always the appropriate selection" concern is shared by many of the people who reviewed the API. The customer who wanted BinaryData also required JSON serialization support as a first class concept. The tight coupling is one of the reasons this type does not ship as part of the BCL and is a fully out of band package.