Nodes for data, attributes for metadata.
I think you made a good argument, although I personally prefer the more mature XML tooling and metadata support for versioning.
I think you made a good argument, although I personally prefer the more mature XML tooling and metadata support for versioning.
On the contrary, I don't remember one single case when the object was described easily using "node/attribute" separation, but couldn't be described as easily using JSON. In fact, I don't even think it's possible, as you can always make two children for each object: "attributes" and "nodes".
So I guess it actually is unnecessary complication and not the benefit of using XML over JSON.
Its a nice soundbite, but it ends up being less than useful in practice, because all metadata is data, and almost any data can be viewed as metadata, a distinction which is both subjective and strongly influenced by the use to which a consumer is putting the data rather than being determined on the basis solely of the inherent nature of the data.
(A soundbite is something altogether different.)