3 ms·
JSON schema was nice when it was simple. Now it feels like writing a validator is extremely complicated. IMO, the built-in vocabularies were enough, and keepi
by jopsen 11mo ago
JSON schema was nice when it was simple.
Now it feels like writing a validator is extremely complicated.
IMO, the built-in vocabularies were enough, and keeping it simple would provide more value.
JSON as a format didn't win because it supported binary number encoding or could be extended with custom data types -- but rather because it couldn't.
- weinzierl 11mo agoThis and schema support for JSON will always be an ill fitting afterthought. If you really, really need the strictness and correctness (and you most probably don't) XML has you covered.
- deleted 10mo ago[deleted]
- eternityforest 10mo agoTo me schemas are absolutely essential for high quality software, I have a hard time imagining a project where I wouldn't want to use them. I also often make heavy use of schema based editors to auto-generate UI. Perhaps I'd feel differently if I ever had to write a validator myself, but they seem to exist in all the popular languages as is.
- gregsdennis 11mo agoI'm currently rebuilding my implementation JsonSchema.Net from the ground up. I completed 95% of it in a weekend, and it already supports all the published versions Draft 6 and later, including the more complex keywords. Granted, I have a particularly deep understanding of the spec already, but it doesn't feel overly burdensome.
- lenkite 10mo agoRight now JSON tech has become more complicated than old-school XML tech.