New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

make specification JSON more self-contained #38

Open
dret opened this Issue Jan 1, 2017 · 3 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
3 participants
@dret
Owner

dret commented Jan 1, 2017

the current way how specifications list concepts is by URIs (as fixed in #36). this is correct, but means that there no easy way to get concept information from the JSON.

{ "concepts": [
  { "http://webconcepts.info/concepts/urn-namespace": "http://webconcepts.info/concepts/urn-namespace/ietf" }]}

the proposal is to make this a bit more self-contained by adding the concept name and value, resulting in something like this:

{ "concepts": [
    { "id": "http://webconcepts.info/concepts/urn-namespace",
      "name": "URN Namespace",
      "value-id": "http://webconcepts.info/concepts/urn-namespace/ietf",
      "value": "ietf" }]}

this would be a breaking change. @kinlane @mogsie @tpluscode @mitraman @BigBlueHat @pmhsfelix, anybody using this and disliking this proposal?

@dret dret added the enhancement label Jan 1, 2017

@tpluscode

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@tpluscode

tpluscode Jan 1, 2017

Contributor

@pmhsfelix can also have something to say

Contributor

tpluscode commented Jan 1, 2017

@pmhsfelix can also have something to say

@dret dret added the bug label Jan 1, 2017

@dret

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@dret

dret Jan 1, 2017

Owner

while documenting the JSON structure it just occurred to me that the current design is really bad, because it creates repeated member names when a specification defines more than one value for a concept. this means that the current design creates correct but rather questionable JSON. this will have to change better sooner than later.

Owner

dret commented Jan 1, 2017

while documenting the JSON structure it just occurred to me that the current design is really bad, because it creates repeated member names when a specification defines more than one value for a concept. this means that the current design creates correct but rather questionable JSON. this will have to change better sooner than later.

dret added a commit that referenced this issue Jan 1, 2017

finishing documentation
need to update this last part when #38 is addressed.

@dret dret self-assigned this Jan 1, 2017

@BigBlueHat

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@BigBlueHat

BigBlueHat Jan 25, 2017

Changing the structure isn't going to throw me off (currently) and the new layout does seem considerably more informative. 😃

Changing the structure isn't going to throw me off (currently) and the new layout does seem considerably more informative. 😃

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment