Re: [wasm] sqlite as rfc-spec'd web-interchange-format?

Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> Sat, 28 November 2020 22:43 UTC

Return-Path: <cabo@tzi.org>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63CDD3A11CA for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 28 Nov 2020 14:43:21 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.919
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.919 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 lAWY7gh-IfNF for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 28 Nov 2020 14:43:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 714DB3A11C3 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 28 Nov 2020 14:43:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.217.118] (p548dce71.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.141.206.113]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4Ck6364T8czyQH; Sat, 28 Nov 2020 23:43:14 +0100 (CET)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\))
Subject: Re: [wasm] sqlite as rfc-spec'd web-interchange-format?
From: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
In-Reply-To: <20201128220253.73CFC28653DA@ary.qy>
Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2020 23:43:13 +0100
Cc: ietf@ietf.org, Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 628296193.912871-9c2524f2940eaed83ca0425078066ffa
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <FA0C9530-CB38-4241-A559-11EB92526006@tzi.org>
References: <20201128220253.73CFC28653DA@ary.qy>
To: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/X3aOd4xx6kRynj1h4S91gFu4Jzc>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2020 22:43:21 -0000

On 2020-11-28, at 23:02, John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> wrote:
> 
> It looks to me like the vast majority of sqlite applications use the C
> library from sqlite.org and it's not clear that there's another full
> implementation. This raises the question of whether the real
> definition is the spec or the code.

Indeed, it is hard to keep a spec document alive if there is only one implementation and that is moving fast.
Compare the recent discussion of rsync, which (apart from a heroic reimplementation effort, which became necessary because of licensing issues, but seems to be stuck at protocol version 27, ca. 2004) is another one of these single-implementation standards.

> There are a lot of widely used data format that the IETF and other
> SDOs haven't blessed, like FITS which is a widely used format for
> multidimensional numeric data, but whose definition is maintained by
> the astronomers who originally designed it.

The 800-pound gorilla in this space is, of course, HDF5.
I don’t think they need the IETF (except that maybe somebody should tell them that text really is always UTF-8 these days).

I think it would be an interesting research project to do a survey of these table-/array-oriented data interchange formats and derive a set of best practices and useful approaches, as well as possibly unexplored avenues.  This would mesh well with various data modeling and semantic interoperability activities we have in IETF and IRTF.  Certainly not something to standardize, and most certainly not https://xkcd.com/927/.

Grüße, Carsten