IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [apps-discuss] JSON Patch

Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> Wed, 23 November 2011 18:06 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 F31C621F8B86 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 23 Nov 2011 10:06:44 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.964
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.964 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.365, 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 Z8oDMcIrv5-h for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 23 Nov 2011 10:06:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net (mailout-de.gmx.net [213.165.64.23]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 0F39221F8B85 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Wed, 23 Nov 2011 10:06:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 23 Nov 2011 18:06:39 -0000
Received: from mail.greenbytes.de (EHLO [192.168.1.140]) [217.91.35.233] by mail.gmx.net (mp045) with SMTP; 23 Nov 2011 19:06:39 +0100
X-Authenticated: #1915285
X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1/YdsEzGvvYBhMqj3V2pvTHtN9z5523i7xLkt2G9f O+uG78XEUmz2Nv
Message-ID: <4ECD3627.702@gmx.de>
Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2011 19:06:31 +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: "Paul C. Bryan" <paul.bryan@forgerock.com>
References: <4EB1482E.1040600@adobe.com> <4EB14C2E.8040208@gmx.de> <1320254564.2622.37.camel@neutron> <4EBBA0DD.9020605@gmx.de> <4ECBC843.60900@gmx.de> <1321986297.2091.1.camel@neutron> <4ECCE93C.406@gmx.de> <1322068744.6133.1.camel@neutron> <4ECD2F60.5080902@gmx.de> <1322071342.6133.14.camel@neutron>
In-Reply-To: <1322071342.6133.14.camel@neutron>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0
Cc: apps-discuss@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] JSON Patch
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: Wed, 23 Nov 2011 18:06:45 -0000

On 2011-11-23 19:02, Paul C. Bryan wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-11-23 at 18:37 +0100, Julian Reschke wrote:
>> On 2011-11-23 18:19, Paul C. Bryan wrote:
>> >  I'm now inclined to simply make"to"  a JSON pointer as well.
>> >  Semantically it's clear, It's easy to apply, and JSON diff
>> >  implementations can be smart if they want and notice something moved
>> >  from one node in the graph to another.
>>
>> +1, except that I'm not convinced that leaving this optional is a good
>> idea...
>
> I'd say if JSON pointer is adopted for "to", it should only be JSON pointer.
>
> Paul

Works for me.

(What I had in mind was to consider something not starting with / as 
relative pointer...)

Best regards, Julian

v2.3.2 | Report a Bug | By Email