Subject: Re: [Json] JSON Schema Language

From: Daniel P <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 8 May 2019 14:48:58 -0400

On May 8, 2019, at 15:48, Pete Cordell <[email-masked]>; wrote:

> On 08/05/2019 00:57, Ulysse Carion wrote:
>> ...  I went with JSON as the representation
>> because it makes building tooling atop of JSON Schema Language much
>> easier, since it doesn't require that the implementor write a parser.

> This makes sense if the only things reading and writing JSON Schema are
> machines. Once you have humans involved, my experience (e.g. XML
> Schema) is that it is a bad choice.

Agreed, I don't think there is any compelling reason to choose JSON as
the representation for a schema language. The grammar of JCR, for
instance, is not particularly difficult to implement, and cannot reasonably be
considered as a barrier to its adoption. What is a barrier is the
absence of any
clear coalescing around any schema proposal, apart from the defacto standard
one, JSON Schema. Without that, it's hard to see people making the
investment.

Daniel