Re: [Json] JSON Schema Language is nearly done: int53

Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> Fri, 02 August 2019 06:47 UTC

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\))
From: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
In-Reply-To: <CAJK=1Rh3mtXxB2iz-HYZ1xzZ8BUqFs2FX8CnE+xxyr7733784A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 02 Aug 2019 08:47:17 +0200
Cc: Anders Rundgren <anders.rundgren.net@gmail.com>, John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org>, JSON WG <json@ietf.org>, "Manger, James" <James.H.Manger@team.telstra.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <6EEAE0DB-A337-4122-B9F5-F3BBBBC45B64@tzi.org>
References: <SY2PR01MB27642C6983E387C397B11581E5DD0@SY2PR01MB2764.ausprd01.prod.outlook.com> <CAJK=1RjhuCYJe4-BSB++8+-dHG3LV8TdqsnFEPAoAkfJ1mOE3A@mail.gmail.com> <SY2PR01MB2764AD4523625006B1F3DFEBE5DC0@SY2PR01MB2764.ausprd01.prod.outlook.com> <aeb4dfcc-4227-2d8e-d1dc-914d078450fe@gmail.com> <SY2PR01MB2764600E16BA7A19025964EFE5DF0@SY2PR01MB2764.ausprd01.prod.outlook.com> <7f663d84-eb38-271f-12c3-a0f4a2261090@gmail.com> <CAJK=1RjqqtZvdWBJNXR6ebKFT1KSkNJHQjiydQ7RJX6aPyB+9g@mail.gmail.com> <CAD2gp_QWcVVbnmuZfuqawR1fW7=iVgtuD1tKWVQ=ME3gjDORvQ@mail.gmail.com> <5ECB215B-AA05-47AB-AC8F-F14A74A46FEE@tzi.org> <df86cce7-f6f4-2077-6076-6d550368c6f6@gmail.com> <CAJK=1Rh3mtXxB2iz-HYZ1xzZ8BUqFs2FX8CnE+xxyr7733784A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ulysse Carion <ulysse@segment.com>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/json/s0ZMIIs0fFZAa9t4Nc98AEL4nqE>
Subject: Re: [Json] JSON Schema Language is nearly done: int53
Precedence: list

> On Aug 2, 2019, at 06:39, Ulysse Carion <ulysse@segment.com> wrote:
> 
> Within this discussion we’ve seen precisely why I don't think JSL should take on directly supporting currency-related stuff. 

The more powerful data definition languages don’t need any more functionality here, e.g., in CDDL one would simply write:

decimal-monetary-value = text .regexp "-?[0-9]+(\\.[0-9]+)?”

For a data definition scheme such as JSL, which opts out of specifying subtypes of what are the common base types in programming languages, this would indeed seem to be misplaced.

Let’s see how well JSL withstands the “just this one more feature” urge…

Grüße, Carsten

Re: [Json] JSON Schema Language is nearly done: i… Manger, James
Re: [Json] JSON Schema Language is nearly done: i… Ulysse Carion
Re: [Json] JSON Schema Language is nearly done: i… Manger, James
Re: [Json] JSON Schema Language is nearly done: i… Pete Cordell
Re: [Json] JSON Schema Language is nearly done: i… Anders Rundgren
Re: [Json] JSON Schema Language is nearly done: i… Manger, James
Re: [Json] JSON Schema Language is nearly done: i… Anders Rundgren
Re: [Json] JSON Schema Language is nearly done: i… Ulysse Carion
Re: [Json] JSON Schema Language is nearly done: i… Anders Rundgren
Re: [Json] JSON Schema Language is nearly done: i… John Cowan
Re: [Json] JSON Schema Language is nearly done: i… Carsten Bormann
Re: [Json] JSON Schema Language is nearly done: i… Anders Rundgren
Re: [Json] JSON Schema Language is nearly done: i… Ulysse Carion
[Json] Monetary type: JSON Schema Language is nea… Anders Rundgren
Re: [Json] JSON Schema Language is nearly done: i… Carsten Bormann
Re: [Json] JSON Schema Language is nearly done: i… Pete Cordell
Re: [Json] JSON Schema Language is nearly done: i… Anders Rundgren