Mailing-List: contact dev-help@jackrabbit.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@jackrabbit.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of julian.reschke@gmx.de
 designates 213.165.64.22 as permitted sender)
Message-ID: <4EE1F650.7030305@gmx.de>
Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2011 12:51:44 +0100
From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64;
 rv:8.0) Gecko/20111105 Thunderbird/8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: dev@jackrabbit.apache.org
CC: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Michael_D=FCrig?= <mduerig@apache.org>
Subject: Re: [Jackrabbit Wiki] Update of "Jsop" by ThomasMueller
References: <CB07AB92.21015%mueller@adobe.com> <4EE1F1CC.8050708@apache.org>
In-Reply-To: <4EE1F1CC.8050708@apache.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

On 2011-12-09 12:32, Michael D�rig wrote:
>
>
> On 9.12.11 11:23, Thomas Mueller wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>>> if this is supposed to be a generic format for use outside
>>> Jackrabbit. But I'm starting to believe it's not.
>>
>>> *If* we want to support ordered collections, than the JSON mapping
>>> should contain additional information on the sort order of the members.
>>> Like this:
>>>
>>> {"a": {}, "b": {}, "c": {}, "{somejcrrelateduri}sortorder": [ "a", "b",
>>> "c" ] }
>>
>> -1 that's too weird for me. Also, duplicating data is always problematic.
>
> What about
>
> {[{"a": {}}, {"b": {}}, {"c": {}}]}
>
> ? ;-)

Cute, but will make JSON Pointers complicated - so we would trade a 
usable pointer notation for a more compact object representation.

Best regards, Julian