Re: [apps-discuss] JSON mailing list and BoF

Francis Galiegue <fgaliegue@gmail.com> Tue, 19 February 2013 00:13 UTC

Return-Path: <fgaliegue@gmail.com>
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 9D30321E8094; Mon, 18 Feb 2013 16:13:35 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id S9ZQdXlYEN3L; Mon, 18 Feb 2013 16:13:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ea0-f182.google.com (mail-ea0-f182.google.com [209.85.215.182]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DBBF21E8051; Mon, 18 Feb 2013 16:13:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ea0-f182.google.com with SMTP id a12so2532395eaa.27 for <multiple recipients>; Mon, 18 Feb 2013 16:13:31 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=6cpnPVgFhd4i//EpE/2sC4Rv15kVPHoz7gX9qYLpndU=; b=Xy7S8JFVZBivQ9V+8n/wPwJaiqvfbla4mpQpEKFDrS7ZlbPhhvXuPDGhLQLHEaKE9i aTToa1oUD8hH77R4xe/19pqds1jOYsBBtzDDPDem/EvkW/47Dltan0pp7hMHoGXAGhQR p4yWdbIRZOUaQiupOh/b+kIy0HocrbGIrUEwpCjvV7f6MNYeEa5aHjXlQgPu//oGviK9 LWOc4T3S7Wviu+JH7ye91/p0VG+yVXWqszthTbaNsaCbyZth7EVstcRGnD9dAEV5C63i tQB4SP/wbw3Loi/37Rvopf8HRGjrCLKCWaGhBCbyFVXI8pkEj34NeiV7o66dJ9I+Oh5e 3e8w==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.14.183.67 with SMTP id p43mr50201198eem.10.1361232811387; Mon, 18 Feb 2013 16:13:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.14.1.7 with HTTP; Mon, 18 Feb 2013 16:13:31 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <A723FC6ECC552A4D8C8249D9E07425A70F8950F8@xmb-rcd-x10.cisco.com>
References: <CALcybBDTd7fDnQ-zAiaG5srEJppfJHgQdBQzyoaU7DaHA=wPPw@mail.gmail.com> <A723FC6ECC552A4D8C8249D9E07425A70F8950F8@xmb-rcd-x10.cisco.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2013 01:13:31 +0100
Message-ID: <CALcybBASCnye2JB98-vQnknkb2Pwu9wfOrXY_ygQqNipac5qwg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Francis Galiegue <fgaliegue@gmail.com>
To: "Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr)" <jhildebr@cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Cc: "apps-discuss@ietf.org" <apps-discuss@ietf.org>, "json@ietf.org" <json@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] JSON mailing list and BoF
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, 19 Feb 2013 00:13:35 -0000

On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 12:52 AM, Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr)
<jhildebr@cisco.com> wrote:
> On 2/18/13 2:02 PM, "Francis Galiegue" <fgaliegue@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/appsawg/trac/wiki/JSON
>>
>>JSON Schema is missing from this page (it has been updated recently
>>and is now three specifications).
>
> As an individual.
>
> I'd say that a way to unambiguously specify further standards that use
> JSON seems reasonable.  Whether it's json-schema or json-content-rules, or
> something else seems like a fertile ground for discussion.
>
> I like Cyrus's argument that all we need is the ABNF of the JSON world,
> and that any attempt to get more complicated than that will likely lead us
> down the XSD rathole.
>

Well, I'd like to hear the reasoning behind this argument ;)

I have really struggled to make this specification useful, and
witnessing the users of my library alone, it looks like the pure
validation part of JSON Schema already has quite a few users...

I also make the best efforts not to repeat XSD's mistakes, and right
now JSON Schema is young enough that it cannot have made such mistakes
(I _think_). But in order not to repeat such mistakes, advice from
external people is of course needed.

Which is why reviews are always welcome!

-- 
Francis Galiegue, fgaliegue@gmail.com
Try out your JSON Schemas: http://json-schema-validator.herokuapp.com