Re: If not JSON, what then ?

On 2016/08/03 05:24, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> --------
> In message <>, Mark Nottingham wri
> tes:
>> If containers are only allowed to contain simple types, the need for a
>> schema language diminishes quite a bit; headers can be defined pretty
>> easily in prose, perhaps with references to registries where
>> appropriate.
> It is not significantly harder to specify recursive structures than
> flat structures, but of course the work to do so will make many
> people want not to.

Also, I'd be afraid of the first time there is a real use case that is 
recursive or has more levels than planned for; the separate syntax and 
implementation will be ugly, or people might just go recursive the 
obvious way but implementations will vary on how they take it.

Regards,   Martin.

Received on Thursday, 4 August 2016 08:24:31 UTC