Re: [Json] Schemas & so on

Erik Wilde <> Sun, 01 May 2016 23:41 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9CF9D12B037 for <>; Sun, 1 May 2016 16:41:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.791
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.791 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=neutral reason="invalid (public key: not available)"
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rDzyaMsNa_p5 for <>; Sun, 1 May 2016 16:41:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 31AB512D532 for <>; Sun, 1 May 2016 16:41:02 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=default; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version :Date:Message-ID:From:Cc:References:To:Subject; bh=y9nrAs6DRMcFvn35mKUqm2iMQMH12YS/spkorr3U0Hg=; b=nHKGfx+KjpBVa8Tm3C3ipT7kof BX1JSIOJxxhmM/ws5yFVsqTmiFcpzwzgCxOTDY3aqCB+HbX6ZgLVb7ZzZi2EiQWwRpttFxtZ/nPUJ qTYxJZln5eN65OisGIrlQffGyqYcU1aT4tYHlSDx7DuX2oxv3ayqwpdnv3f9ClBgcTsQuAXDlIvQT RMqimf2DHczMzDhgkmEwBagZP8p/b76KEz/YIUbY6qaJwr2932LzFEfAPjwlW2Eq6tV3RHRKCVolv +pvgpl++9ZUEiklqZo430G7/vO9tJGsqHAQEp/rEG6Eb0CUB1Es8sbnZ2wf97trXXofPCB6RBb9xv 5l8C5aKQ==;
Received: from ([]:60599 helo=[]) by with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.86_1) (envelope-from <>) id 1ax0yy-0007ih-OV; Sun, 01 May 2016 19:41:01 -0400
To: "" <>
References: <>
From: Erik Wilde <>
Message-ID: <>
Date: Sun, 1 May 2016 16:40:55 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname -
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain -
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain -
X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: authenticated_id:
Archived-At: <>
Cc: Tim Bray <>
Subject: Re: [Json] Schemas & so on
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: "JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\) WG mailing list" <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 01 May 2016 23:41:04 -0000

On 2016-05-01 13:55, Tim Bray wrote:
> I had never really concerned myself much with options for JSON language
> definition, but have discovered they’re not very good.  The JSON Schema
> project is not terribly appealing - opaque spec, poor documentation and
> tools - and smells of neglect (last I-D expired in 2013).  It's been
> suggested that a good approach would be just to write a jq program that
> emits true or false.

FYI, at the WWW2016 conference three weeks ago there was a paper looking 
at JSON schema which came away with the same conclusions: 
implementations behave differently, but sadly that can (at least in 
part) be blamed on the spec itself, which simply is not completely 
specifying what a JSON schema really means:

personally, i think that a better schema language might have some 
chances in the wild, something that's similar to what RELAX NG is in XML 
land: focused, clean, and simple. JSON schema is a rather odd grab bag 
of features, and as long as the semantics are not completely defined, i 
wouldn't even really call it a language.

so currently, there really isn't a language that's stable and popular 
enough so that some subset of readers/developers/tools would be happy to 
see and use a schema. which i think is not great.



erik wilde | |
            |    |
            |    |