> If it's only used with the "application/json" media-type, and it can > define that "items" always refers to _array_ items (i.e. numbered) and > the JSON _top-level_ object is an array, then I have no such concern. I agree, it should only be applicable when the top-level entity is an array. > I'm a bit surprised that the top-level object in a JSON request would > be an array, though. For round-trip minimisation in AJAX applications > isn't it usual to send a bit of auxiliary metadata, or a few objects > together, and therefore the top-level JSON object tends to be an > object (i.e. several named data items) with one of its members being > an array, rather than the top-level object being an array itself? I am trying to move away from that approach, moving metadata to headers (ironically the offset and total count are the most common metadata items, and these are handled by the Content-Range header), allowing the actual content to be a "pure" representation of the resource, and therefore an array is the most natural top-level construct when requesting a collection of objects. KrisReceived on Tuesday, 2 September 2008 14:37:04 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:50:54 GMT