iTechGuides is reader-supported. When you buy through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. Learn more
A data interchange format is an agreed way to represent information so different systems can exchange and process it. CSV, JSON, and XML are common examples, but using the same format does not by itself ensure that two systems interpret the data the same way: they also need shared rules for structure and meaning.
What a data interchange format defines
A data interchange format describes how data is represented for exchange. It may set out syntax and structure, but it does not necessarily explain what each field means or how a receiving system should interpret it.
Ecma International’s ECMA-404 describes JSON as “a lightweight, text-based, language-independent syntax for defining data interchange formats.” The standard defines valid JSON syntax; it does not assign meaning to a particular JSON document. The systems exchanging that document must agree on the semantics they will apply.
Format, standard, and API: how they differ
- Format: the representation and syntax used to encode data.
- Exchange standard: shared rules that may cover the format as well as structure, data types, vocabularies, metadata, or transfer requirements. A standard can make exchanges more consistent, but implementations still need to match.
- API: an interface through which software accesses or exchanges data. An API is not itself a data format; it can carry data encoded in JSON, XML, or another agreed format.
For example, an API may return JSON, but the API and JSON syntax alone do not tell a receiving application whether a field named date means a creation date, a due date, or something else. The participating systems need an agreement that supplies that meaning.
#1 Best Overall
Common data interchange formats
| Format or family | What it represents well | What to consider |
|---|---|---|
| CSV | Plain-text rows and columns for tabular data. | Check recipient support and agree how to handle delimiters, quotes, and line breaks inside values. Consider how the recipient will interpret data types. |
| JSON | Structured data, including objects and arrays, in a lightweight text syntax. | Confirm application compatibility, shared field meanings, and validation requirements. JSON syntax alone does not define application-specific semantics. |
| XML | Tagged structures for documents and data exchange; schemas and standards can express structure and validation rules. | Consider the existing ecosystem, document complexity, metadata needs, and the schema both sides will use. |
| RDF / Turtle | Linked-data representations that can express relationships between entities and datasets. | Useful to consider when linked relationships and semantic-web tooling are part of the exchange. |
| Domain-specific standards | Sector-specific structures or metadata, such as CDISC ODM, Define-XML, Dataset-JSON, and Dataset-XML for clinical-research data and metadata exchange. | Check applicable industry or regulatory requirements, required metadata, and counterpart support. |
These options are not interchangeable in every workflow, and none is a universal winner. The right choice depends on the data’s shape, recipient support, validation and metadata needs, and any applicable sector rules.
How to choose a format for an exchange
- Check what the receiving system accepts. Confirm the specific format and implementation it supports; a general standard may permit multiple representations that still require the sender and receiver to choose the same one.
- Match the format to the data. CSV fits simple rows and columns; JSON suits structured application data; XML can serve structured data and richer document needs; linked-data representations address explicit relationships.
- Agree on meaning and validation. Define field meanings, data types, permitted values, required metadata, and any schema or vocabulary both systems will use.
- Check sector requirements. In a specialist field such as clinical research, determine whether a domain-specific standard is required instead of relying on a general-purpose format alone.
Does the same format guarantee interoperability?
No. A shared format can give systems a common way to parse data, but interoperability also depends on matching implementations and shared meaning. Two systems can both accept JSON, for example, yet interpret the same field differently. Agree on the structure and semantics of the exchange, and use any required schema, vocabulary, or sector standard.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.JSON’s formal standard
ISO/IEC 21778:2017 is the international standard for JSON data interchange syntax. ISO’s record says the 2017 edition was reviewed and confirmed in 2023, so that page identifies it as current following that review.
Quick Recap
Best Value
- Made in USA
- No matter how knowledgeable you are, you will find new and interesting information in this book
- Exclusive pressure and velocity factors enable you to accurately calculate pressure and velocity for reduced loads
- A never before published in depth analyses of current load data
- No matter how knowledgeable you are, you will find new and interesting information in this book
Rank #4
- Used Book in Good Condition
Rank #3
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
