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

Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> Tue, 08 November 2011 19:18 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 CB22121F8AD8 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Nov 2011 11:18:46 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -104.02
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.02 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.421, 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 VsyI9+jZPPPP for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Nov 2011 11:18:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net (mailout-de.gmx.net [213.165.64.22]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id DFC2321F8AF2 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Tue, 8 Nov 2011 11:18:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 08 Nov 2011 19:18:44 -0000
Received: from mail.greenbytes.de (EHLO [192.168.1.140]) [217.91.35.233] by mail.gmx.net (mp060) with SMTP; 08 Nov 2011 20:18:44 +0100
X-Authenticated: #1915285
X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1/cyhsKg8DcUiHcxh8Mf5BUgL2ydLeqeflX3C4mrV kr21f2RvpXKoWS
Message-ID: <4EB98090.5020203@gmx.de>
Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2011 20:18:40 +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> <4EB97122.7010206@gmx.de> <D75C8075-C8DF-4AA2-9DFC-CED719A0564E@mnot.net>
In-Reply-To: <D75C8075-C8DF-4AA2-9DFC-CED719A0564E@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 19:18:46 -0000

On 2011-11-08 20:10, Mark Nottingham wrote:
> I don't think URIs should be used for this.
> ...

Well, one use case that the proposal is addressing is the transport of 
data from frameworks that *already* use URIs; such a WebDAV properties 
or JCR identifiers. In these cases you really have only the choice of 
using the identifiers you have, or establishing a completely new 
identifier system.

And yes, it would be helpful if the draft was just saying that and not 
make the impression that it was solving the generic problem for JSON.

Best regards, Julian