Re: [Jsonpath] Jsonpath Digest, Vol 2, Issue 1

[Carsten Bormann <[e-mail]>]

On 2020-08-11, at 21:56, Daniel P <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> Note that there is an emerging ISO SQL/JSON standard for JSONPath that
> appears to have
> the backing of Google, Amazon, Microsoft and Oracle, cf.
> https://standards.iso.org/ittf/PubliclyAvailableStandards/c067367_ISO_IEC_TR_19075-6_2017.zip

This is a TR, but it contains a lot of useful material.  Lots of examples!

> It seems to me that a separate standardization effort would need to
> take this work into account

Definitely!  Thank you for the pointer.

> and be
> compatible with it, to have broad acceptance.

For a definition of compatible.  For instance, I would like to learn more about actual usage of the “strict mode” (*).  Also, it is not clear to me that using SQL as the underlying model will work well for all applications.  But that is exactly what we need to discuss in more detail!

The question right now is what should be written up in the charter.  Unless there is a potential for a WG lockup that can only be avoided by making a selection at WG chartering time, I generally prefer to have the WG make the decisions based on its ongoing work, instead of guessing these decisions at chartering time based on more incomplete information.

Grüße, Carsten

(*) My mental model at the moment is that a JSONPath expression can be valid or erroneous; application of a valid expression yields a result (which may be empty), but does not raise errors.  That may not be the right model for all applications.