Re: [Json] Schemas & so on

Rob Sayre <sayrer@gmail.com> Sun, 01 May 2016 23:41 UTC

Return-Path: <sayrer@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0BB212B037 for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 1 May 2016 16:41:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.699
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DVy27XiClrUD for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 1 May 2016 16:41:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ig0-x233.google.com (mail-ig0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c05::233]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D876C12D10E for <json@ietf.org>; Sun, 1 May 2016 16:41:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ig0-x233.google.com with SMTP id bi2so71007209igb.0 for <json@ietf.org>; Sun, 01 May 2016 16:41:01 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc; bh=Fu+huXaA8iyUd6IoXURp2mPSU8clz/j3/hFs2hFeFyk=; b=Db+9NdKfsCwRifxIojeWWV0v/vm2i+R3frIdQIVDIpYlwUcj28bwF3O80mA62qOHYO nQSOWbPGdt6SwEwTdw+qUZv7xudxKPFcVQML1Omc/G/vU0Ax+hhtE+ToMJ9Ik0jg8Jei vtk35QOCX4sQnFSNUFAnr41d66/gfvSjm7hzn2Vc1iepxa7sNPaFjAgZ1WmLd0rzPPLf K0w7dz8flouogfIgKTVHX7nmA8frvqEx1WhazUAKoL8GaZ0aO8eIsJpP4Q0bOGhDl1Dc xrLouGU+QEAjK8eWYzUmcPbpcVAxgKd7Wgp42vx/en2BevuTR530pV1w6FzSBeJ0biAH X7fw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc; bh=Fu+huXaA8iyUd6IoXURp2mPSU8clz/j3/hFs2hFeFyk=; b=Ss5/kqozMM3fcYwkia5bWipxNkDTbRE+4ts9ofKb3u4gX69GYZguFcZKqpN4x92DKI 0C/M5I1CqiDVFRLi3iik/h0+62MbFKgrrScJBCfiyBdASEql8f+V3lfTQTQ1K2E0gHMP Xs3aJh4rCxa+glxMNZbY+/B/Kpp5q5TzNCppvaXXdy1N//1/wG4SWPYrpsctAocO7bXe pqtxR94pAzW/uBn5zICGKHkY7j8wzxwRfto9yaPuyMxYr+rZwa7Yzi/C82Pulp/m5fyC +Po02/ot/3XkV8W5Zho7Fx8IJWZWJJO2skyAq6Vquz0EQpU4Vn/J2aaeRKaDLiZCWtT9 JJKw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FVcLrrQka+DFTh/biCbLYqPdsWOK+cqzt5EplaGU7HP0gcmzZI7OVIhC7xmP3JPCSuM1PpbbVM9ypMdTg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.50.180.202 with SMTP id dq10mr17219756igc.37.1462146061199; Sun, 01 May 2016 16:41:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.107.52.1 with HTTP; Sun, 1 May 2016 16:41:01 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <7a6edf91-30d1-383b-4548-e12b988f9467@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
References: <CAHBU6itCV9MXmALdKtE9-vjUPG6-6ZqdqzrmZkcEzSUysi3S-w@mail.gmail.com> <7a6edf91-30d1-383b-4548-e12b988f9467@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
Date: Sun, 1 May 2016 16:41:01 -0700
Message-ID: <CAChr6Sz9gas0HCNW6M4jw3eUZXL+YW9vw+Smon4FHcVnj_LZCQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Rob Sayre <sayrer@gmail.com>
To: =?UTF-8?Q?Martin_J=2E_D=C3=BCrst?= <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=14dae93406679687eb0531d068d5
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/json/wEdgNxBk0Z65vEB6kYDM031Sj5Y>
Cc: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>, "json@ietf.org" <json@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Json] Schemas & so on
X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: "JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\) WG mailing list" <json.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/json>, <mailto:json-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/json/>
List-Post: <mailto:json@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:json-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/json>, <mailto:json-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 01 May 2016 23:41:04 -0000

It's rough terrain because anything that requires a schema could also avoid
parsing and use Protobufs, Thrift, Avro, etc. I've had good luck with
Thrift and Protobufs/gRPC. ymmv.

- Rob

On Sun, May 1, 2016 at 4:30 PM, Martin J. Dürst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
wrote:

> Hello Tim,
>
> On 2016/05/02 05:55, Tim Bray wrote:
>
>> I find myself tasked with specifying a JSON-based DSL and preparing it for
>> public release, with a validator and so on.
>>
>> 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.
>>
>> Is there good conventional wisdom about formally specifying a JSON
>> dialect?
>>
>
> Sorry for playing the devil's advocate, but asking the same for XML would
> give a lot of different opinions. I wouldn't expect the schema landscape
> (if it developed) to be much different, because there's a large span
> between simplicity and expressiveness that can be covered, and a lot of
> notational choices.
>
> In addition to that, many people use JSON because they don't want to use
> XML (if they don't have any actual experience, they at least heard that
> it's somehow "problematic", and that often extends to schemata). So the
> JSON's users tendency seems to be to try and avoid schemata.
>
> Regards,   Martin.
>
> _______________________________________________
> json mailing list
> json@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/json
>