[uf-rest] Introducing JAHAH

[Bob Ippolito]

On Jan 5, 2006, at 8:24 PM, Dr. Ernie Prabhakar wrote:

> Hi Bob,
>
> On Jan 5, 2006, at 6:00 PM, Bob Ippolito wrote:
>>> http://opendarwin.org/~drernie/C499496031/E20051026153908/index.html
>>
>> Well you didn't say you were speaking of something other than the  
>> mainline XOXO :)  Given that extension, yes, there is certainly a  
>> complete mapping from JSON to XOXO... not quite the other way  
>> around though.  JSON has no representation for data, date, or set  
>> and list-of-dicts would be lossy.
>>
>> I think there's too much TMTOWTDI in your spec though.
>
> One of the things about microformats (in case you hadn't learned  
> how the game is played here :-) is to try to follow existing  
> conventions as much as possible.  In this case, I started with Mac  
> OS X plists, and moved to XML Schema Datatypes:
>
> http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#built-in-datatypes
>
> Yes, it is somewhat complex, but it is a well-defined standard.    
> I'm certainly open to doing something simpler, but I'd want to have  
> some reasonably strong precedent, so it doesn't just become  
> personal taste.  I do like the idea of defaulting to a generic,  
> high-precision 'number' class, especially since it is easy to  
> specialize using multiple classes.
>
> I personally like the Mac OS X plist typing (number, data, etc.),  
> but I don't know if that's normative enough to drive a web standard.

Personally I think it should be the simplest thing that could  
possibly work.  Isn't that the idea behind microformats?  If someone  
wanted to play the XML game, they would...

-bob