Re: [apps-discuss] Question about draft-snell-merge-patch-08

Francis Galiegue <fgaliegue@gmail.com> Mon, 17 February 2014 06:48 UTC

Return-Path: <fgaliegue@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8DD01A043C for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 16 Feb 2014 22:48:58 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id s4GlOSDvEHhW for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 16 Feb 2014 22:48:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ea0-x231.google.com (mail-ea0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4013:c01::231]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A7791A002D for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Sun, 16 Feb 2014 22:48:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ea0-f177.google.com with SMTP id m10so4317572eaj.8 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Sun, 16 Feb 2014 22:48:53 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=8g7wPP2Tn+ZXGi66y3lARjF6PRiCSniXu1HiU/dxOhc=; b=OjAOFSAPWEeePlC9/6Xp+8iPDjH7ITvg6peZZ71ahR6xUNnufytBvjI89Z/+qNLIKq kkQRKMDImTWtdoESrCAnoKSbP5otDtFHMab5GlL+boPSk2kcsnvXbRL1C6Pzfk9z/uVz qGF8bY8c8N2k2ZjskXrm/KMmnNgH4sSgpHidoyHxa3NziQo+7/q+y/nkGlOp8sVU7I9S l4fpbcVgCiLXAktel9e2WVSP3QUeKMPGT1xPF20/AMldxQpyYsx3YXNj+idNS5piIegz UeTS4dvz+dVrMZP+OOT8Z5ti82TE8oJ/DiFS5CU34XGZ+2j00OZnOeIkt3TFgUGJ6Dae z6dg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.14.110.68 with SMTP id t44mr293850eeg.74.1392619733749; Sun, 16 Feb 2014 22:48:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.14.223.132 with HTTP; Sun, 16 Feb 2014 22:48:53 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <255B9BB34FB7D647A506DC292726F6E1153B519138@WSMSG3153V.srv.dir.telstra.com>
References: <CALcybBAtKofVGcE0Kmq1zRc85VdS4ngPSoBxhxXb-6vEv4oOJQ@mail.gmail.com> <255B9BB34FB7D647A506DC292726F6E1153B519138@WSMSG3153V.srv.dir.telstra.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2014 07:48:53 +0100
Message-ID: <CALcybBBWC-mXPxhiEALP+M=TmfsJGddr=0_DYqCqQsz3bvdBsA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Francis Galiegue <fgaliegue@gmail.com>
To: "Manger, James" <James.H.Manger@team.telstra.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/apps-discuss/yNPPp61WW9aAm8xwE41Cz5GdVgQ
Cc: "apps-discuss@ietf.org" <apps-discuss@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] Question about draft-snell-merge-patch-08
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Mon, 17 Feb 2014 06:48:59 -0000

Hello,

On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 7:16 AM, Manger, James
<James.H.Manger@team.telstra.com> wrote:
[...]
>
>> Similarly, if the patch were { "foo": { "bar": null } }, would the
>> result be { "foo": {} } or { "foo": { "bar": null } }?
>
> { "foo": {} } is the sensible answer.
>

OK, I have since noticed that the reference draft is
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-appsawg-json-merge-patch-02, and
the text in this draft is more clear about that.

However, there is also that text in section 2, which kind of troubles
me, since there are no examples:

          [...] Any null member contained in a provided array MUST be
          ignored and treated as if the member was undefined, even
          within array or object members within the array.

Uhm. So, does this mean that if the value is:

[ 1, null, { "a": null } ]

then it really should be patched to:

[ 1, {} ]

?

Also, in point 1 (ie, both the patch and victim are arrays), it only
says that "Any null member contained in the merge patch MUST be
ignored and treated as if those members are undefined". What are
members here? Does that include array elements?

-- 
Francis Galiegue, fgaliegue@gmail.com
JSON Schema in Java: http://json-schema-validator.herokuapp.com