5 ms·

3) set types, 4) optional schemas 5) multiline strings 6) consistent support for numeric types 7) streaming data The litany is not short and I'm sure I've over

3) set types, 4) optional schemas 5) multiline strings 6) consistent support for numeric types 7) streaming data The litany is not short and I'm sure I've overlooked a couple.

selectnull 6y ago
8) date types
speedgoose 6y ago
You can try json schema. Streaming data is also easy with json lines. But if you add too many features, it may end up like XML.
- abraxas 6y ago
  yeah, you can do everything by imposing more topology on top of JSON just like as it happened with XML. The JSON advocates are slowly reinventing everything that their parents built into XML 20 years earlier. My hunch is that it will share its path in acquiring bloat.
  - mianos 6y ago
    From what I have seen, the excessive topological frameworks on top of JSON have never really take off. There have been many schema systems available for 10 years now but for some reason everyone seems to fall back to accepting basic JSON. There is a place for this stuff but only in very limited areas. Hopefully it does not go too far, for example like Microsoft did with SOAP. I still have nightmares from work decoding completely wrong XML generated by the native SOAP XML generators in old C# banking apps.
austincheney 6y ago
JSON is popular because it’s tiny. If you want to trade tiny for a litany of features and data types then just use XML.
aloisdg 6y ago
You should try XML. You may like it.
- KiwiJohnno 6y ago
  That reminds me of my favourite XML quote: "XML is a lot like violence. If it isn't solving your problem, then you aren't using enough of it"
  - bfuclusion 6y ago
    JAXB is at the same time awesome, and completely terrifying.
emil0r 6y ago
So basically EDN.
- abraxas 6y ago
  Right
throw0101a 6y ago
> 4) optional schemas Perhaps CDDL: * https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8610 https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8610
user5994461 6y ago
What do you mean by schema? JSON supports schema with libraries included in most popular languages nowadays. https://json-schema.org/ https://json-schema.org/ For numeric types, if you handle integer larger than 2 billions or floating numbers where the precision is critical (that's where json fails), these can and should be represented as string. I don't think there is any common format that guarantees large numbers and/or arbitrary precision to be encoded and decoded properly across languages and platforms.

3) set types, 4) optional schemas 5) multiline strings 6) consistent support for numeric types 7) streaming data The litany is not short and I'm sure I've overlooked a couple.

selectnull 6y ago

8) date types

speedgoose 6y ago

You can try json schema. Streaming data is also easy with json lines. But if you add too many features, it may end up like XML.

abraxas 6y ago
yeah, you can do everything by imposing more topology on top of JSON just like as it happened with XML. The JSON advocates are slowly reinventing everything that their parents built into XML 20 years earlier. My hunch is that it will share its path in acquiring bloat.
- mianos 6y ago
  From what I have seen, the excessive topological frameworks on top of JSON have never really take off. There have been many schema systems available for 10 years now but for some reason everyone seems to fall back to accepting basic JSON. There is a place for this stuff but only in very limited areas. Hopefully it does not go too far, for example like Microsoft did with SOAP. I still have nightmares from work decoding completely wrong XML generated by the native SOAP XML generators in old C# banking apps.

austincheney 6y ago

JSON is popular because it’s tiny. If you want to trade tiny for a litany of features and data types then just use XML.

aloisdg 6y ago

You should try XML. You may like it.

KiwiJohnno 6y ago
That reminds me of my favourite XML quote: "XML is a lot like violence. If it isn't solving your problem, then you aren't using enough of it"
- bfuclusion 6y ago
  JAXB is at the same time awesome, and completely terrifying.

emil0r 6y ago

So basically EDN.

abraxas 6y ago
Right

throw0101a 6y ago

> 4) optional schemas Perhaps CDDL: * https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8610 https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8610

user5994461 6y ago

What do you mean by schema? JSON supports schema with libraries included in most popular languages nowadays. https://json-schema.org/ https://json-schema.org/ For numeric types, if you handle integer larger than 2 billions or floating numbers where the precision is critical (that's where json fails), these can and should be represented as string. I don't think there is any common format that guarantees large numbers and/or arbitrary precision to be encoded and decoded properly across languages and platforms.