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

Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> Tue, 08 November 2011 19:20 UTC

Return-Path: <mnot@mnot.net>
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 5445421F8AF6 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Nov 2011 11:20:46 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.499
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.499 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.100, 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 mMjVjS2f344r for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Nov 2011 11:20:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mxout-07.mxes.net (mxout-07.mxes.net [216.86.168.182]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A868921F8AED for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Tue, 8 Nov 2011 11:20:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [10.6.129.78] (unknown [64.39.4.135]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.mxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D4DF422E258; Tue, 8 Nov 2011 14:20:44 -0500 (EST)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1251.1)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
In-Reply-To: <4EB98090.5020203@gmx.de>
Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2011 13:20:45 -0600
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <6A0CCE36-5FBE-48E9-A307-1C59C155D8BB@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>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1251.1)
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 19:20:46 -0000

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.

Cheers,

--
Mark Nottingham
http://www.mnot.net/