Re: [apps-discuss] draft-saintandre-json-namespaces-00 comments

Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> Tue, 08 November 2011 18:13 UTC

Return-Path: <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA49C11E8095 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Nov 2011 10:13:01 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -104.124
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.124 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.525, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GQkG92BlxItu for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Nov 2011 10:13:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net (mailout-de.gmx.net [213.165.64.22]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id B1D7911E807F for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Tue, 8 Nov 2011 10:13:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 08 Nov 2011 18:12:58 -0000
Received: from mail.greenbytes.de (EHLO [192.168.1.140]) [217.91.35.233] by mail.gmx.net (mp068) with SMTP; 08 Nov 2011 19:12:58 +0100
X-Authenticated: #1915285
X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1++SMJekQK+wNHa+j6EMPjb0nJk8V5vOz3JseHuLu Msx1vVgNh/5u91
Message-ID: <4EB97122.7010206@gmx.de>
Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2011 19:12:50 +0100
From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:8.0) Gecko/20111105 Thunderbird/8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
References: <4EB923CF.7080600@wp.pl> <566A345F-15CD-473B-8472-11EDF73A3862@vpnc.org> <9D5B00CA-9370-45D6-835B-3C7A1ADFEBBC@mnot.net>
In-Reply-To: <9D5B00CA-9370-45D6-835B-3C7A1ADFEBBC@mnot.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0
Cc: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>, apps-discuss Discuss <apps-discuss@ietf.org>, Dominik Tomaszuk <ddooss@wp.pl>
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] draft-saintandre-json-namespaces-00 comments
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2011 18:13:02 -0000

On 2011-11-08 18:10, Mark Nottingham wrote:
> +1 to Paul's -10.
>
> My take on it:
>
> http://www.mnot.net/blog/2011/10/12/thinking_about_namespaces_in_json
>
> Let's keep this simple and avoid repeating the mistakes of XML, OK?
> ...

Well, there are two different issues:

1) Using URIs for disambiguation, and

2) Using a prefix-URI mapping to make things more compact.

The reasons for 2) would be readability and compactness, but would make 
processing the content much more complex. I don't believe it's needed here.

Re 1) -- well, if you have URI-based identifiers to start with, there's 
little choice. You could declare the problem to be an SOP, in which case 
you shouldn't even look at the draft. Or one could introduce yet another 
indirection mechanism (-> 2).

Best regards, Julian