XML is commonly utilized for web application messaging – sending information back to a browser from a web server, or sending information between web accommodations. It’s dead facile to do this and it works very well, hence XML has become the de-facto cull for data exchange for web applications. Alternatives such as YAML and JSON have found consequential support in recent years. Both aim to be a more felicitous alternative to XML in some cases.

XML might not be the best cull in all cases, but that’s no revelation

As we understand XML is not ideal, and JSON or YAML may be more preponderant in some cases. JSON might be more expeditious, YAML might be more preponderant (and more comely). Both YAML and JSON needs twice as much memory as XML while decoding.

As far as JSON is concerned, if you’re not utilizing Javascript, there isn’t much persuasive relevancy. The reason that JSON is so nice in web development is that it is instantly perceived by the browser’s JS interpreter as an object so there’s no adscititious parsing obligatory. This is only true in Javascript, though. Any other language requires a custom library to interpret JSON.

XML supports structured data format language whereas  JSON and YML supports structured data interchange formats.

YAML’s finesses, subtle variations in the grammar that sanction you to indite special cases in a more concise style. The upshot is that YAML endeavors to look homogeneous to a W3C standard, and engenders a minuscule library of hard to read literature concerning its concepts and rules.