asterixdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Chris Hillery <chill...@hillery.land>
Subject Re: json vs. JSON
Date Thu, 06 Aug 2015 06:00:12 GMT
On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 5:45 PM, Till Westmann <tillw@apache.org> wrote:

> I think that one of the questions is if we want to map the atomic ADM
> types to a single value in clean JSON of if we want them to map to
> structured types (objects, arrays).
>
> My first reaction would have been to use the structured types for lossless
> JSON and only single values for clean JSON.


A good argument, and I think I agree, especially if there is a reasonable
single value (usually string) to map it to.

Looking for something that might be accepted I stumbled upon
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Well-known_text , but I'm actually not sure
> if that's a good fit (even if it seems to be supported by a number of DBMS
> ...).
>

Yeah, that looks promising, although I'm having a hard time finding an
actual definition of that format. But in every reference I can find, it
appears that it still omits circle. This led me to here:
http://forums.mysql.com/read.php?23,148162,152625#msg-152625

which offers a reasonably compelling argument for why "circle" is not a
reasonable shape to discuss in geospatial contexts (loosely, because
there's no consistent way to map that to a spherical coordinate system).

Does this mean that perhaps ADM shouldn't *have* a "circle" primitive type?
I assume that the ADM spatial types are intended for geospatial work, and
if the consensus of the smart people is that "circle" doesn't fit in that
world, perhaps we shouldn't include it either?

Ceej
aka Chris Hillery

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message