Re: [Json] Proposed minimal change for duplicate names in objects

[John Cowan <[e-mail]>]

Stefan Drees scripsit:

> JSON in the role of data interchange format allows at that point the
> multiset use case. Bad behaviour IMO is when misusing this.
> 
> The expectation, that the unordered list of names in a single object
> must form a set and not a multiset is questionable.

Nevertheless, anyone who generates JSON with duplicate names in order to
represent a multimap deserves to lose, because many, many JSON parsers
will simply throw away all but the last as an unintended consequence of
their implementation strategies.

I assume you mean a multimap rather than a multiset: a multiset would be
most naturally represented as a JSON object whose values are integers
representing the number of occurrences of a particular object in the
multiset.  By the same token, the natural representation of a multiset
is a JSON object whose values are arrays. whose order is semantically
irrelevant.

> {"Stefan":"male","Stefan":"native German","could not resist":true}

{
  "given name" : "John",
  "gender" : "male",
  "citizenship" : {"country" : "US", "source" : "jus soli"},
  "ethnicity" : ["German", "Irish"],
  "annotations" : {
    "verbose" : true,
    "machine-processable" : true
  }
}

-- 
John Cowan                              [e-mail]
            http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
Humpty Dump Dublin squeaks through his norse
                Humpty Dump Dublin hath a horrible vorse
But for all his kinks English / And his irismanx brogues
                Humpty Dump Dublin's grandada of all rogues.  --Cousin James