Subject: [apps-discuss] JSON Patch

From: "Paul C. Bryan" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 01 Nov 2011 15:42:55 -0700

I have published and have been maintaining a JSON Patch Internet-Draft:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-pbryan-json-patch-02

There's now at least three actively maintained implementations in as
many programming languages. Interest has been expressed in moving this
toward an RFC. I've discussed this briefly with Mark Nottingham, Pete
Resnick and Peter Saint-Andre, and consensus seems to be to raise this
with APPSAWG and see if there's any interest in developing this on a
standards track.

Thoughts?

Paul

---

From: Enrico Marocco <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 10:13:00 +0100

Hi Paul,

the need for such a mechanism periodically arises in the alto WG as a
means for providing incremental updates with the JSON-based protocol
that's being specified over there. I, for one, certainly support moving
this forward, possibly in a specifically chartered WG where usecases and
requirements from different contexts could be best evaluated.

Enrico

---

From: Graham Klyne <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 02 Nov 2011 09:54:14 +0000

I'm in favour of this.

I'd be interested to hear if anyone has done any implementation work to use this 
to apply deltas to RDF data expressed using JSON (such as JSON-LD - 
http://json-ld.org/) - I'm guessing it should be a pretty good fit, but there 
may be devil in the detail.

#g
--=

On 01/11/2011 22:42, Paul C. Bryan wrote:
> _______________________________________________
> apps-discuss mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss

---

From: Mark Nottingham <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 21:18:49 +1100

If it needs to be said, I'm +1 on this.

I don't think we need a separate WG on this -- it's relatively simple (and should stay that way). The important thing is to get momentum behind a single way to do it. APPAWG can accomplish that easily (and if it gets any harder, I'd recommend that the authors go Informational).

Cheers,

On 02/11/2011, at 9:42 AM, Paul C. Bryan wrote:

> There's now at least three actively maintained implementations in as many programming languages. Interest has been expressed in moving this toward an RFC. I've discussed this briefly with Mark Nottingham, Pete Resnick and Peter Saint-Andre, and consensus seems to be to raise this with APPSAWG and see if there's any interest in developing this on a standards track.
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> Paul

--
Mark Nottingham   http://www.mnot.net/