Re: [apps-discuss] JSON Patch: Shortening operation names?

Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> Tue, 06 December 2011 13:07 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 BDD3121F8B50 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 6 Dec 2011 05:07:44 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -104.008
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.008 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.409, 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 JibfsrMV+QwH for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 6 Dec 2011 05:07:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net (mailout-de.gmx.net [213.165.64.22]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id D5EC021F8B4F for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Tue, 6 Dec 2011 05:07:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 06 Dec 2011 13:07:42 -0000
Received: from mail.greenbytes.de (EHLO [192.168.1.140]) [217.91.35.233] by mail.gmx.net (mp046) with SMTP; 06 Dec 2011 14:07:42 +0100
X-Authenticated: #1915285
X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1+W7MoLlQ6WFCOMHhm6P71CGHQ7MYw9zAHxE63fAW zMxOix3gkSviqb
Message-ID: <4EDE139C.1060405@gmx.de>
Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2011 14:07:40 +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: Dave Cridland <dave@cridland.net>
References: <1323136558.12382.28.camel@neutron> <4EDDEE37.1020501@ninebynine.org> <3373.1323173881.459586@puncture>
In-Reply-To: <3373.1323173881.459586@puncture>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0
Cc: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>, General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] JSON Patch: Shortening operation names?
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, 06 Dec 2011 13:07:44 -0000

On 2011-12-06 13:18, Dave Cridland wrote:
> On Tue Dec 6 10:28:07 2011, Graham Klyne wrote:
>> I'd be inclined to stick with the readable names, unless there's a
>> clear case that the extra bytes will have significant effect on
>> performance.
>
> Shrt nms tnd 2 rduc rdblty 4 0 effct.
> ...

Actually, readability is the main reason why I would support such a 
change; in a diff format, using a single-character notation might 
*improve* the readability (compare to the traditional diff format).

Best regards, Julian