Re: [apps-discuss] JSON Schema considered harmful

[Phillip Hallam-Baker <[e-mail]>]

On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 5:36 PM, Francis Galiegue <[e-mail]>wrote:

> On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 11:28 PM, Phillip Hallam-Baker <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
> [...]
> >>
> >> There is no maxOccurs, no minOccurs. Where on earth did you see that?
> >
> >
> > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-zyp-json-schema-03
> >
> >     5.13. minItems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
> >      5.14. maxItems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
> >
> [...]
> >
> > That would seem to be the same as the XML Schema constraints only someone
> > changed the name.
> >
>
> This is the old specification. It is being redone.
>

So when you were attacking me for not reading the specification you were
referring to a version that has not yet been submitted as a draft?

You really are a piece of work.


And you don't understand JSON at all, do you? Can you tell a JSON
> array from a JSON object? From what I read: no...


I think that we are reaching the point where I suggest that you no longer
be heard. You keep making these personal attacks. In fact I think they have
somewhat marred your whole approach from the start.

You really don't have standing to lecture other people on what they do or
do not understand.

I didn't say I was referring to objects when I mentioned the maxItems
thing. I used the XML Schema terminology but that hardly changes my case
that the feature is unnecessary in XML Schema and almost certainly
unnecessary here.


Before you dig yourself in deeper I suggest you find out who you are
directing your attacks at and decide whether my being unable to understand
you would be a fault of mine, a defect in your presentation or a confusion
in the case you present.



> >> No, you decidedly DID NOT make even an ATTEMPT to read the proposed
> >> specifications. It's in the README.md on the main page, damnit!
> >
> >
> > I read the Internet draft. If you are refering to a different spec then
> we
> > have an even bigger problem.
> >
>
> YOU have a problem. You don't know how to read.


I don't know how to read documents that have not been submitted.

Argument from undisclosed specification is not exactly convincing.

-- 
Website: http://hallambaker.com/