Re: [apps-discuss] Last Call: <draft-ietf-appsawg-json-pointer-07.txt> (JSON Pointer) to Proposed Standard

[Conal Tuohy <[e-mail]>]

On 07/01/13 13:23, Matthew Morley wrote:
>
> For me the deficiency is not in the pointer, but patch format being 
> generated.
>
> One approach is to push that *one* test, structure conformity, into 
> the pointer syntax. Another is via the type operation.
>
> If a vague patch is generated, vague results are to be expected.
It seems to me, on the contrary, that the deficiency is in the pointer 
syntax, and I think it would be a mistake to try to work around that 
deficiency in JSON Patch. Because aren't there other things which one 
might do with JSON Pointer than use it with JSON Patch? There's been 
mention of having it registered as a URI fragment identifier syntax for 
JSON for example. JSON Pointers could then end up all over the place, 
outside of patches. IMHO JSON Pointer needs to be taken seriously as a 
technology in its own right.

-- 
Conal Tuohy
HuNI <http://huni.net.au/> Technical Coordinator 
<http://apidictor.huni.net.au/trac/wiki/ConalSpace>
Victorian eResearch Strategic Initiative 
<http://versi.edu.au/about-us/versi-team#Con>
Skype: conal.tuohy
Twitter: @conal_tuohy <https://twitter.com/conal_tuohy>