Re: [Json] JSON Schema

+1

I have been designing protocols for 25 years and I have never come across a
requirement to specify a minimum number of items in a set that is other
than 0 or 1 and never come across a reason to specify a maximum other than
1 or infinity.

When I have come across other limits, I have pretty much always found them
to be wrong. Take the requirement to have two authoritative servers for a
DNS zone (not enforced by the protocol but enforced by the social
infrastructure around it). That seemed such a good idea to me till I found
the two authoritative servers for the MIT LCS/AI running on a couple of
sparc stations plugged into the same wall socket.

The less twiddles and curlicues, the better.

Validation is not useful for a data schema. It is useful for a document
schema because it allows an intelligent editor to tell the user if they are
filling in what really amounts to a form correctly.

My other objection is to the use of JSON syntax and the limitation to JSON
encoding. I don't see a reason to limit scope to one encoding. I write my
systems using a schema language that is at least in principle capable of
targeting ASN.1 and XML as well as JSON. This approach only allows me a
subset of the capabilities of ASN.1 and XML schema which is exactly the
point.

On Sun, Jan 21, 2018 at 5:21 PM, Rob Sayre <sayrer@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi all.
>
> There are much more efficient and unambiguous formats available if there's
> a schema at hand.
>
> thanks,
> Rob
>
>
> On Sun, Jan 21, 2018 at 2:11 PM, Henry Andrews <henry@cloudflare.com>
> wrote:
>
>> The full set of current documents is on the web page:
>>
>> http://json-schema.org/specification.html
>>
>> The first set of links (in the table) go to locally hosted renderings of
>> each document.
>> Beneath that, there are links to the IETF-hosted documents.
>>
>> If you want to see why the numbering is so incredibly confusing, there's
>> a "Specification LInks" page linked under "Older Drafts"
>>
>> -henry
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 2:59 PM, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 20 Jan 2018, at 13:25, Henry Andrews wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi folks,
>>>>   I'm one of the JSON Schema draft editors, and it's been brought to our
>>>> attention that the JSON Schema project may fit within this working group
>>>> (or a successor?  I'm a little confused as to the current status and
>>>> scope
>>>> of this group).
>>>>
>>>
>>> The WG is closed and thus has no charter. If you want an IETF WG for
>>> JSON Schema, it would need to be a new WG. The new WG could be chartered
>>> just to work on JSON Schema, and not every other JSON-y idea that comes by.
>>>
>>>   The current draft is draft-07 (although the actual IETF numbering is
>>>> complicated).  So draft-02 was a very long time ago :-)
>>>>
>>>
>>> Could you point to the actual documents you are talking about? I see
>>> draft-handrews-json-schema-00, which is not at -07,
>>>
>>> --Paul Hoffman
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>>    -
>>
>>    *Henry Andrews*  |  Systems Engineer
>>    henry@cloudflare.com
>>    <https://www.cloudflare.com/>
>>
>>    1 888 99 FLARE  |  www.cloudflare.com
>>    -
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> json mailing list
>> json@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/json
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> json mailing list
> json@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/json
>
>