On 12 May 2009, at 11:20, Richard Davies wrote:
Therein lies the problem - there are no "standard tools" nor any way to specify a cross-platform mechanical transform for JSON (at least not yet).
Yes, I agree with you there - if we're going with multiple formats it'll be easier to define XML -> JSON than JSON -> XML.
Hi Richard, Rather than transforming across the actual formats, there seems to be a interest in defining a model and then describe how to render onto various data formats. So, rendering-down, rather then transforming- across. (?) The data formats discussion is a tricky one to resolve, as there's things to like in each of JSON, ATOM and key-value. That said, the "compliant, but non-interoperable implementations through supporting multiple representations" is a strong argument for a single format. Whatever that may be ... regards Roger
Richard. _______________________________________________ occi-wg mailing list occi-wg@ogf.org http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/occi-wg
Roger Menday (PhD) <roger.menday@uk.fujitsu.com> Senior Researcher, Fujitsu Laboratories of Europe Limited Hayes Park Central, Hayes End Road, Hayes, Middlesex, UB4 8FE, U.K. Tel: +44 (0) 208 606 4534 ______________________________________________________________________ Fujitsu Laboratories of Europe Limited Hayes Park Central, Hayes End Road, Hayes, Middlesex, UB4 8FE Registered No. 4153469 This e-mail and any attachments are for the sole use of addressee(s) and may contain information which is privileged and confidential. Unauthorised use or copying for disclosure is strictly prohibited. The fact that this e-mail has been scanned by Trendmicro Interscan and McAfee Groupshield does not guarantee that it has not been intercepted or amended nor that it is virus-free.