Re: [Json] Do not use ABNF for JSON schemas!

Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com> Sat, 15 March 2014 18:10 UTC

MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <619B38E7-B8FD-4640-97A8-B523AF655B9E@tzi.org>
References: <53238F2E.5010105@cisco.com> <CAHBU6itv0q7ZTrran+dKTcUxoSxNHYnND7yLmSPF35--iUMA+w@mail.gmail.com> <CAMm+Lwi6Ha0r55vb3VNsgz40Bds6HYZ-aM9u-JwyVmoRDuZaWw@mail.gmail.com> <420F0699-9F27-435E-924C-28966A743EAF@vpnc.org> <CAHBU6iv=pUmq1Jdi+VkFnEG0+Ef7pBnSMtPdVNaHFxu6x5RFBQ@mail.gmail.com> <D93BF076-90B2-4AF0-BDD6-29BF4332AABF@vpnc.org> <CAK3OfOhqfJWX747jZs40amrdRV5T3aTxrMHsCvW-5jdN9zq40w@mail.gmail.com> <C77851F1-FBB2-47AD-B263-565593899D8C@vpnc.org> <890D8059-2280-48D5-820B-2E75852AF334@vpnc.org> <619B38E7-B8FD-4640-97A8-B523AF655B9E@tzi.org>
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2014 11:10:49 -0700
Message-ID: <CAHBU6ivPg=rW9715TiL6zLZqXx+-RrnETe-aEk6v42vfOBPccw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
To: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="bcaec547c6232f915404f4a91b5b"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/json/jjcSIeIoratzYHT4yrTkM02d9cQ
Cc: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>, IETF JSON WG <json@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Json] Do not use ABNF for JSON schemas!
Precedence: list

+1


On Sat, Mar 15, 2014 at 10:03 AM, Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> wrote:

> On 15 Mar 2014, at 17:50, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org> wrote:
>
> > Here's a JSON format that could definitely use a simple JSON description
> language of some sort. The draft authors went the ABNF route, and it's
> completely unclear where they are going until you look at the examples and
> realize how trivial the format really is.
>
> One extremely useful result this WG could have is eliciting an IESG
> statement that ABNF representations of JSON schemas are verboten.
>
> Grüße, Carsten
>
> _______________________________________________
> json mailing list
> json@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/json
>

[Json] Call for WG Consensus on Whether or Not to… Matt Miller
Re: [Json] Call for WG Consensus on Whether or No… Tim Bray
Re: [Json] Call for WG Consensus on Whether or No… Phillip Hallam-Baker
Re: [Json] Call for WG Consensus on Whether or No… Nico Williams
Re: [Json] Call for WG Consensus on Whether or No… Paul Hoffman
Re: [Json] Call for WG Consensus on Whether or No… Tim Bray
Re: [Json] Call for WG Consensus on Whether or No… Paul Hoffman
Re: [Json] Call for WG Consensus on Whether or No… Nico Williams
Re: [Json] Call for WG Consensus on Whether or No… Paul Hoffman
Re: [Json] Call for WG Consensus on Whether or No… Paul Hoffman
[Json] Do not use ABNF for JSON schemas! Carsten Bormann
Re: [Json] Do not use ABNF for JSON schemas! Tim Bray
Re: [Json] Call for WG Consensus on Whether or No… Phillip Hallam-Baker
Re: [Json] Call for WG Consensus on Whether or No… Tim Bray
Re: [Json] Call for WG Consensus on Whether or No… Phillip Hallam-Baker
Re: [Json] Call for WG Consensus on Whether or No… Tim Bray
Re: [Json] Call for WG Consensus on Whether or No… Stefan Drees
Re: [Json] Call for WG Consensus on Whether or No… Carsten Bormann
Re: [Json] Call for WG Consensus on Whether or No… David Rosenborg
Re: [Json] Call for WG Consensus on Whether or No… Bjoern Hoehrmann
Re: [Json] Call for WG Consensus on Whether or No… Phillip Hallam-Baker