Note: This post is part of a long-running series of posts covering the union of jQuery and ASP.NET: jQuery for the ASP.NET Developer.

Topics in this series range all the way from using jQuery to enhance UpdatePanels to using jQuery up to completely manage rendering and interaction in the browser with ASP.NET only acting as a backend API. If the post you're viewing now is something that interests you, be sure to check out the rest of the posts in this series.

One group of searches that consistently brings traffic here is variations on the error: Invalid JSON primitive. Unfortunately, the post that Google sends that traffic to doesn’t address the issue until somewhere within its 150+ comments.

Today, the topic gets its own post.

If you’ve worked with ASMX ScriptServices or Page Methods without ASP.NET AJAX’s client-side proxy (e.g. using jQuery or pure XMLHttpRequest code), you’ve may have seen this cryptic error yourself. Or, perhaps you’ve just arrived here due to seeing it for the first time.

Either way, you may be surprised to learn that the most common reason for this error is that you’ve lied to ASP.NET during your AJAX request.

It all begins with the Content-Type

HTTP’s Content-Type header is a fundamental aspect of communication between browsers and servers, yet often remains hidden from us in day-to-day development. The Content-Type header allows an HTTP connection to describe the format of its contents, using Internet media types (also known as MIME types). A few common ones that you’ve probably seen before are text/html, image/png, and the more topical application/json.

Without the flexible negotiation process content types provide, your users’ browsers and your version of IIS would have to both be “ASMX Compatible” and “JSON Compatible” in order for ScriptServices to function. What a nightmare that would be! The IE6 difficulties we face today would pale in comparison.

Further, Content-Type negotiation is part of what allows a single URL, such as WebService.asmx, to represent data in more than one format (e.g. XML and JSON in ASMX’s case).

The benefits of Content-Type negotiation are well worth a bit of occasional hassle.

Okay, but why does that matter?

When your browser sends a POST request, the W3C’s recommendation is that it should default to using a Content-Type of application/x-www-form-urlencoded. The HTML 4.01 spec describes that serialization scheme:

This is the default content type. Forms submitted with this content type must be encoded as follows:

  1. [Omitted for brevity; not relevant to this post.]
  2. The control names/values are listed in the order they appear in the document. The name is separated from the value by ‘=’ and name/value pairs are separated from each other by ‘&’.

For an example of what that means, consider this simple form:

When the preceding form is submitted with URL encoded serialization, the request’s POST data will look like this:

Firebug screenshot showing the URLEncoded POST data

That standardized serialization format allows a server-side backend like ASP.NET to decipher a form submission’s contents and give you access to each key/value pair. Regardless of what sort of browser submits a form to the server, the Content-Type facilitates a predictable conversion from POST data to server-side collection.

In other words, the Content-Type corresponds to a serialization scheme.

What does that have to do with JSON Primitives?

Understanding Content-Type negotiation and how it relates to serialization is important due to its role in coaxing JSON out of ASMX ScriptServices. Specifically, the fact that you must set a Content-Type of application/json on the request means you’re instructing ASP.NET to interpret your input parameters as JSON serialized data.

However, the W3C’s mandate of URL encoding by default means that most AJAX libraries default to that serialization scheme. Similarly, AJAX tutorials targeting endpoints other than ASMX ScriptServices (including even ASP.NET MVC examples) will describe sending URL encoded data to the server.

In other words, when you’re working with a client-side object like this:

The default serialization scheme makes it easy to inadvertently transmit that data to the server as a URL encoded string:

Again, remember that a Content-Type of application/json is a requirement when working with ASMX ScriptServices. By setting that Content-Type on the request, you’ve committed to sending JSON serialized parameters, and a URL encoded string is far from valid JSON.

In fact, it’s invalid JSON (primitive?), hence the cryptic error message.

Instead of the URL encoded string above, you must be sure to send a JSON string:

Whether you’re using XMLHttpRequest directly or a JavaScript library that abstracts the details, getting your request’s serialization wrong is the root of the invalid JSON primitive error. However, a more specific issue tends to be the leading cause of this happening.

When good JavaScript libraries go bad

The most common source of this error stems from a subtlety of using jQuery’s $.ajax() method to call ASMX ScriptServices. Cobbling together snippets of code from the documentation, platform agnostic tutorials, and even posts here on my site, it’s easy to end up with something like this:

Notice the JavaScript object literal being supplied to $.ajax()’s data parameter. That appears vaguely correct, but will result in the invalid JSON primitive error.

Why? jQuery serializes $.ajax()’s data parameter using the URL encoded scheme, regardless of what Content-Type is specified. Even though the contentType parameter clearly specifies JSON serialization, this URL encoded string is what jQuery will send to the server:

That obviously isn’t valid JSON!

The solution is as simple as two single-quotes:

Did you spot the difference?

Instead of a JavaScript object literal, the data parameter is a JSON string now. The difference is subtle, but helpful to understand. Since it’s a string, jQuery won’t attempt to perform any further transformation, and the JSON string will be unimpeded as it is passed to the ASMX ScriptService.

It doesn’t have to be this way

The problem is trivial once you’re aware of the underlying issue, but there’s not a great reason I can see why things need to be this way in the first place. Either half of this equation could easily provide a remedy.

jQuery – I believe the most correct solution would be $.ajax() attempting to honor the serialization scheme indicated by its contentType parameter. In the case of application/json, fixing this could be easy as testing for JSON.stringify and using it if available. That would work great, but also avoid adding any complexity/size to jQuery core.

That would leave it our responsibility to reference a copy of json2.js in older browsers, but that convention wouldn’t be much of a burden. We generally do that anyway when the client-side objects get complex.

Microsoft – It’s absolutely correct that the framework throws an error when you lie to it about what you’re sending. However, a bit of leniency could potentially save thousands of hours spent troubleshooting this problem (if my search traffic is any indication of its prevalence).

Is there any reason that the ScriptHandlerFactory can’t intelligently differentiate between between JSON and URL encoded inputs? If the first non-whitespace character of the request isn’t an opening curly brace, why not attempt to deserialize it as URL encoded before throwing an invalid JSON primitive error?