3 ms·

I liked your survey ;) It would be great if you could disclose (in a few days or so) how many visitors took part in it compared to how many people your site vis

I liked your survey ;) It would be great if you could disclose (in a few days or so) how many visitors took part in it compared to how many people your site visited! I find your concept a little bit messy though (while your website design is really clean, I love it!). I think it's because you described so many ideas without a lot of technical explanations. Your scenarios are helpful, but they are also quite superficial - I don't see exactly how your solution might be of help there. I also had difficulties extrapolating how your solution might work technically from you example document. I think you need a very robust and clear implementation for it to be really useful! Btw, I spent some significant time on a typed data description language meant to be an alternative to JSON, also with extensive schema support. I had a vision very similar to yours, but I failed to implement it. It just turned out to be too hard to do it so that its usage is always frictionless. Just a couple of days ago, however, I started to port some of my ideas to a very slim JSON-Schema alternative. As a key difference to your idea, I don't want to include turing complete validators into the schema but rather use globally unique type names so that these validators can be implemented somewhere else in arbitrary programming languages. It also allows for automatic UI generation. If you want to stay in touch and exchange ideas, you can reach out to me on twitter (hediet_dev)!

IsaiahShiner 7y ago
Hey! Well, I can tell you that as of right now, it's hovering around 0.8% conversion, which isn't terrible. We'll see if I can improve that before activity on the page dies down. You're right, what I have now is relatively messy. I was balancing brevity and specificity. If I was properly technical in my descriptions, it may have read like documentation. And then the other issue is that I have both business people and programmers on the page, and each gets kinda confused because I'm not sure who to cater too. Same problem with the case studies. I had them more specific before, but I cut out what I thought was unnecesary and now they appear rather simple. I think the solution is to split the whole thing up into several dedicated pages, which I resisted because it would take longer, and this is all probably less important than building product right? Regardless, I do now intend to add an FAQ, and write some sort of a technical paper/RFC, (which I should probably do anyway before I run off and start writing serious code). I'm not totally sure what to do about the case study, maybe just replace the entire thing with a video? I would love to hear more about the project you tried! Naturally, I haven't been able to Google examples of people who tried this idea before and failed. It does sound different in that, I really do intend dits to be fully, totally and completely generic. Nothing other than the idea of labels with scripts which describe payloads is sacred. Any language, any style, anything. This means that it can't possibly miss a certain use case (you can just build it) but it does mean that the whole thing is rather complicated, and as others have said, maybe too complicated, like a pipe dream. I am certainly willing to accept that, but no way to find out the result of that without building it. I really question whether a more restricted system like JSON-Schema could ever become dominant because it's much more prescriptive, especially when you have a limited number of possible data types. In my mind, data can truly look like anything, so coming up with a rigourous standard doesn't seem realistic: there can always be a more broad standard, ala https://xkcd.com/927/ https://xkcd.com/927/ as others have mentioned. I intend to beat 927 by taking the high ground. Its like Lisp: you can't make a more generic Lisp, because anything that satifisfies the components of Lisp is just a dialect. You can't have incompatible data or an incompatible competitor to DitaBase, its totally generic. I also don't see why you couldn't do UI generation with DitaBase using the controllers (I concept I have not explained yet, they allow CRUD for a specific schema). I am not very knowledgable on Twitter, but now seems like a great time to start! I appreciate the invitiation!

IsaiahShiner 7y ago

Hey! Well, I can tell you that as of right now, it's hovering around 0.8% conversion, which isn't terrible. We'll see if I can improve that before activity on the page dies down. You're right, what I have now is relatively messy. I was balancing brevity and specificity. If I was properly technical in my descriptions, it may have read like documentation. And then the other issue is that I have both business people and programmers on the page, and each gets kinda confused because I'm not sure who to cater too. Same problem with the case studies. I had them more specific before, but I cut out what I thought was unnecesary and now they appear rather simple. I think the solution is to split the whole thing up into several dedicated pages, which I resisted because it would take longer, and this is all probably less important than building product right? Regardless, I do now intend to add an FAQ, and write some sort of a technical paper/RFC, (which I should probably do anyway before I run off and start writing serious code). I'm not totally sure what to do about the case study, maybe just replace the entire thing with a video? I would love to hear more about the project you tried! Naturally, I haven't been able to Google examples of people who tried this idea before and failed. It does sound different in that, I really do intend dits to be fully, totally and completely generic. Nothing other than the idea of labels with scripts which describe payloads is sacred. Any language, any style, anything. This means that it can't possibly miss a certain use case (you can just build it) but it does mean that the whole thing is rather complicated, and as others have said, maybe too complicated, like a pipe dream. I am certainly willing to accept that, but no way to find out the result of that without building it. I really question whether a more restricted system like JSON-Schema could ever become dominant because it's much more prescriptive, especially when you have a limited number of possible data types. In my mind, data can truly look like anything, so coming up with a rigourous standard doesn't seem realistic: there can always be a more broad standard, ala https://xkcd.com/927/ https://xkcd.com/927/ as others have mentioned. I intend to beat 927 by taking the high ground. Its like Lisp: you can't make a more generic Lisp, because anything that satifisfies the components of Lisp is just a dialect. You can't have incompatible data or an incompatible competitor to DitaBase, its totally generic. I also don't see why you couldn't do UI generation with DitaBase using the controllers (I concept I have not explained yet, they allow CRUD for a specific schema). I am not very knowledgable on Twitter, but now seems like a great time to start! I appreciate the invitiation!