jackrabbit-oak-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefan Guggisberg <stefan.guggisb...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [Jackrabbit Wiki] Update of "Jsop" by JulianReschke
Date Thu, 05 Apr 2012 14:31:57 GMT
On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 3:53 PM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote:
> On 2012-04-05 15:41, Stefan Guggisberg wrote:
>>
>> ...
>>
>>> The question here is what needs to interop with that.
>>>
>>> If this format is used purely inside Oak, we don't have to deal with it.
>>>
>>> If this is positioned as a generic patch format for JSON, we do have to.
>>>
>>> It would be good to finally decide on where we want to go with this
>>> format.
>>
>>
>> agreed. while i like the idea of JSOP diff becoming a generic patch format
>> for JSON i don't think that it's worth the extra headaches. on second
>> thought
>> i am now convinced that we should not support JSON Pointer (i.e. the
>> escaping of forward slashes).
>>
>> i imagine such paths could/will be used in URLs. paths like
>> "/foo/bar/yes^/no" would
>> certainly cause problems.
>>
>> WDYT?
>> ...
>
>
> Well.
>
> If "/" is allowed in object names (in a role other than a path separator),
> we need to be able to escape them.
>
> If we don't need them, there's nothing to worry about in practice, as the
> escaping will never happen for us...

/me confused ;)

i agree that in our current use of this format within oak it won't be a problem
since "/" cannot occur in a name.

however, you said that if JSOP diff (or whatever it's going to be
callled) is positioned
as a generic patch format for JSON, we do have to deal with ^/ in paths/names,
i.e. JSOP protocol implementations need to be able to handle it.

are you arguing for positioning JSOP diff as a generic patch format for JSON
or against?

cheers
stefan

>
> Best regards, Julian

Mime
View raw message