IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [apps-discuss] #10: json-pointer fragment identifiers

"Manger, James H" <James.H.Manger@team.telstra.com> Tue, 03 July 2012 23:35 UTC

Return-Path: <James.H.Manger@team.telstra.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 C41F311E80CE for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 Jul 2012 16:35:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.034
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.034 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.133, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_AU=0.377, HOST_EQ_AU=0.327, RELAY_IS_203=0.994]
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 PTN-DD9eARNm for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 Jul 2012 16:35:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ipxano.tcif.telstra.com.au (ipxano.tcif.telstra.com.au [203.35.82.200]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0520311E8083 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Tue, 3 Jul 2012 16:35:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.77,519,1336312800"; d="scan'208";a="85599666"
Received: from unknown (HELO ipcbni.tcif.telstra.com.au) ([10.97.216.204]) by ipoani.tcif.telstra.com.au with ESMTP; 04 Jul 2012 09:36:08 +1000
X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="5400,1158,6761"; a="75163647"
Received: from wsmsg3752.srv.dir.telstra.com ([172.49.40.173]) by ipcbni.tcif.telstra.com.au with ESMTP; 04 Jul 2012 09:36:06 +1000
Received: from WSMSG3153V.srv.dir.telstra.com ([172.49.40.159]) by WSMSG3752.srv.dir.telstra.com ([172.49.40.173]) with mapi; Wed, 4 Jul 2012 09:36:05 +1000
From: "Manger, James H" <James.H.Manger@team.telstra.com>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2012 09:36:04 +1000
Thread-Topic: [apps-discuss] #10: json-pointer fragment identifiers
Thread-Index: Ac1Y/OsTxKLsa+NxSIC09ITMB/8nSAAdiJMw
Message-ID: <255B9BB34FB7D647A506DC292726F6E114F7600D61@WSMSG3153V.srv.dir.telstra.com>
References: <C58A9550-DB3A-48C3-9E5A-E39C1836E8A2@team.telstra.com> <4FF2B90B.3050408@gmx.de>
In-Reply-To: <4FF2B90B.3050408@gmx.de>
Accept-Language: en-US, en-AU
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US, en-AU
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "apps-discuss@ietf.org" <apps-discuss@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] #10: json-pointer fragment identifiers
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, 03 Jul 2012 23:35:59 -0000

> >>> Picking the right key from a JSON Web Key value is a possible use
> [draft-ietf-jose-json-web-key].
> >
> >> It seems that you then would have to rely on array indices, right?
> >
> > Yes, with the current JWK syntax. http://example.org/jim.json#/keys/1
> to pick the 2nd key.
> > ...
> 
> And relying on a specific order is not a problem? (Asking because this
> seems to be a nice example for a case where a more expressive pointer
> syntax could be useful).

Relying on the order in an array shouldn't be a problem.

Each key can have a key id, which is probably a better way to refer to a particular key. A more sophisticated pointer/fragment syntax could address that, but a better approach is to redesign the JWK JSON syntax so the key id is used as the element name (then a JSON pointer would be a perfect fragment value).

--
James Manger

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email