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

Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> Tue, 08 November 2011 19:24 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 B40141F0C5F for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Nov 2011 11:24:08 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.991
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.991 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.392, 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 N9j+PIyG8cSu for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Nov 2011 11:24:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net (mailout-de.gmx.net [213.165.64.23]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 8C6601F0C35 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Tue, 8 Nov 2011 11:24:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 08 Nov 2011 19:23:37 -0000
Received: from mail.greenbytes.de (EHLO [192.168.1.140]) [217.91.35.233] by mail.gmx.net (mp057) with SMTP; 08 Nov 2011 20:23:37 +0100
X-Authenticated: #1915285
X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1/FNowJrLvFYgm8eCq99z76Ur4tnuDnE/e+BIfaok NZwuOhVbFKJfeZ
Message-ID: <4EB981B6.1090003@gmx.de>
Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2011 20:23:34 +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> <4EB98090.5020203@gmx.de> <6A0CCE36-5FBE-48E9-A307-1C59C155D8BB@mnot.net>
In-Reply-To: <6A0CCE36-5FBE-48E9-A307-1C59C155D8BB@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 19:24:08 -0000

On 2011-11-08 20:20, Mark Nottingham wrote:
>
> On 08/11/2011, at 1:18 PM, Julian Reschke wrote:
>
>> 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.
>
> Ah. I see that as almost an application-specific issue, nothing that should be standardised. Doing that would be leaving sharp tools around small children.
> ...

I think it's worthwhile to have a spec that says:

"If you're identifiers are XML names, then this how to use them in JSON. 
But if you don't have identifiers like these, don't *start* using them 
if you want to use JSON."

Which of course leaves the question open what to do instead :-) (and 
yes, I saw your proposal)

Best regards, Julian