Subject: Re: [netmod] JSON encoding of anyxml

From: Randy Presuhn <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2015 10:43:32 -0800 (GMT-08:00)

Hi -

> From: Robert Wilton
> Sent: Nov 17, 2015 2:19 AM
...
>    As a possible compromise, what about something like:
>
>    The JSON encoding defines that anyxml may be encoded in whatever way
>    the implementor finds useful, or even not at all.  If a preferred
>    custom encoding is not being used, then it is suggested that anyxml
>    data be encoded as a string containing XML to maximize legacy
>    interoperability.

For an "any" type to be conveyed with neither any indication of its
grammar nor of the encoding rules used to assemble that payload makes
me think that interoperability will only happen by lucky accident.

We've already established that it only requires a wave of a magic
wand for the recipient to know the *grammar* of the encoded data.
Is it going to take a second wave of another magic wand for the
recipient (or relay!) to guess what encoding rules have been used
for this value's payload?

Forgive the harsh words, but this seems truly and badly broken.

Randy

---

From: Andy Bierman <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2015 12:14:45 -0800

> Forgive the harsh words, but this seems truly and badly broken.

If I had a datastore in my server that stored mixed-mode XML,
then it would be a problem to send those datastore contents in JSON.
Since no server actually supports this, I don't see the problem.
IMO anyxml NEVER worked for this purpose and still doesn't.

Randy

Andy

>
> _______________________________________________
> netmod mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
>