Re: [apps-discuss] Announce: JSON Schema, I-D version 4

FWIW, since people are talking about it:

I'm about +0.25 on doing this.

On the one hand, XML Schema has created a lot of damage (the more so because many many people still don't understand how harmful it is / can be).

On the other hand, this is not XML Schema. AFAICT it does not try to do nearly as much as XML Schema did. As has been discussed ad nauseum, the major use cases for a schema language are doing QA and documentation, and JSON could use help on both fronts.

So, if it were possible to get enough review / input to assure that it didn't create any of the same problems (in particular, I want to look at how it supports / fails to support format evolution), it'd probably do some amount of good without too much risk. However, we'd have to do that without killing the community around it (i.e., the architects among us would need to restrain themselves).

Just my .02.

Cheers,

On 02/02/2013, at 2:59 AM, Francis Galiegue <fgaliegue@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hello,
> 
> JSON Schema is now up to version 4.
> 
> Links to the specifications:
> 
> * http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-zyp-json-schema-04 (core specification),
> * http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-fge-json-schema-validation-00
> (validation specification),
> * http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-luff-json-hyper-schema-00
> (hyperschema specification).
> 
> It is dependent on two other I-Ds:
> 
> * JSON Reference,
> * JSON Pointer (as a consequence of the first).
> 
> Reviews appreciated. For the recall, JSON Schema has its Google group:
> json-schema@googlegroups.com
> 
> All the best,
> --
> Francis Galiegue, fgaliegue@gmail.com
> Try out your JSON Schemas: http://json-schema-validator.herokuapp.com
> _______________________________________________
> apps-discuss mailing list
> apps-discuss@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss

--
Mark Nottingham   http://www.mnot.net/