- From: Anders Rundgren <anders.rundgren.net@gmail.com>
- Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2016 08:40:43 +0100
- To: Shane McCarron <shane@spec-ops.io>
- Cc: David Ezell <David_E3@verifone.com>, Tony Arcieri <bascule@gmail.com>, Interledger Community Group <public-interledger@w3.org>
On 2016-11-04 18:39, Shane McCarron wrote:
> I couldn't agree more strongly with what David said. The XSD work is
> seminal and more than sufficient for anything we might need as far as I know.
> We have done some really interesting things with JSON Schema and JSON-LD.
> In both cases we just rely on XSD types for the underlying explicit meaning.
Yes, there seems to be many ways mapping unsupported/missing data types as an alternative to explicitly tagging data.
- JSON Schema
- The "old-school" programmatic way: writer.setBigDecimal("amount", bigdecimalvalue)
- Annotations:
https://golang.org/pkg/encoding/json/#example_Marshal
Int64String int64 `json:",string"
Providing an explicit mapping table can also be useful:
https://cyberphone.github.io/doc/security/jcs.html#Data_Types
Anders
Received on Saturday, 5 November 2016 07:41:19 UTC