Google Protocol Buffers: what’s missing from this picture?

Today Google announced Protocol Buffers, described as “think XML, but smaller, faster, and simpler“. Language bindings for C++, Java, and Python. Oddly not even a whisper about JSON, which is a much more apt comparison. And along with that, no JavaScript implementation. So why the omission?

My guess is that it wouldn’t compare that favorably with JSON. The extra needed compile step is a hassle, and doesn’t give enough of a relative benefit for Ajax applications. But perhaps this will unleash a torrent of people asking for ‘binary JSON’. OK, maybe not… -m

2 Responses to “Google Protocol Buffers: what’s missing from this picture?”

  1. Sjoerd Visscher

    JavaScript does not do binary, so that is probably why there is no JS implementation.

  2. Taylor http://ActionScript

    If it’s “like” xml (or Json) it’s primary applicability would be remoting between clients (Ajax, Flash, Flex) and a server. Seems like they should have an AS3 version…but obviously looks like their solution for SOA messaging behind the firewall.

MicahLogic is Stephen Fry proof thanks to caching by WP Super Cache