From nobody Mon Nov 2 09:10:59 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EEB843A0D2C for ; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 09:10:57 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.097 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XXpm8YPamCaL for ; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 09:10:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wr1-x431.google.com (mail-wr1-x431.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::431]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 873753A0D1E for ; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 09:10:55 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wr1-x431.google.com with SMTP id s9so15479598wro.8 for ; Mon, 02 Nov 2020 09:10:55 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=lhGPkvOyFITV79y6mz+9NBwzcYJ4EsCfkBq5u2c1CBY=; b=eHPQRyizy2Ij2cSqo+QDTi84X+SydzrWmBYzYEgJ+QK/JGT3Xw/1NUqU/tJSSSpWlU L+O5azn4Ex3Q4me+BHhsxnxQ7vgOD2PX5uEwFzq6U8AejKtIaOUZqn+RTLioCMMECbLD 8H8Stc9YPF15wludkvectLMftwFgYcDwCZpja1YEuOMOm1IaB4lW+54S29bRkKZ4U8vH UgRGFktOexUWe7iBH24mVb9suqCbyxyCJqFnC9oEeOvsjQZv0aJpZVqtAjXLjE9jo9lQ kLpjkT7H2o0j1hXIiMo/fYqR66i/ceDUiIxpo06M/hIyKMILQOCmsyAWRWQOe4pC2bk2 wJVg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=lhGPkvOyFITV79y6mz+9NBwzcYJ4EsCfkBq5u2c1CBY=; b=tN74bYGmHfWezNLsTrCQP+4hT5kRz4RuvkfyxnKaOb5bdRxBnLidNmr37aQPl1BScJ phaid/WvXZvqsPGOXHkCfzccaGWaTQg5WVeGOi5rnjR8qRWexYLzSOR+bAQ0+E4zCyaA 8av9UdnmfKsOK/qywlwWFQVrIe4biQHMqU39DwIdNp8XWJcu7k2J0ZXsnoMZNxQYnAg8 u6j2d+lZtwDyF7UHOHPohZWn0Yvle+dIz07pa8RHU7qRtXoSu8qMme/Q1Myr0mxqW7q0 HzlAQAMcKa9Zg5hs7SHqTj+r+sAKSpWDrfxnS9k9mQNOoc3/ahK5BfrfIGi0qiOycIW3 mQ9g== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531irlkNsdvzUQcI+hjMONXfJbwevL55XJSn5/1orMJGgiye54M8 s22tUcVvN6wlAU+zBrBmQA4= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJx+AzIInS9KPPv8D6fWzhVQ6XSDIMV14IEnVgSmTtGZcHcZC9lNQvTZuIDvW8DzTCOyxuIogA== X-Received: by 2002:adf:f7c3:: with SMTP id a3mr22750137wrq.254.1604337053546; Mon, 02 Nov 2020 09:10:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.97] (8.144.199.146.dyn.plus.net. [146.199.144.8]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id f7sm24104509wrx.64.2020.11.02.09.10.52 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 02 Nov 2020 09:10:52 -0800 (PST) From: Glyn Normington Message-Id: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_9E2786FA-82FA-488B-913C-26F3189588FC" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\)) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2020 17:10:51 +0000 In-Reply-To: Cc: jsonpath@ietf.org To: Tim Bray References: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] Firing up the jsonpath working group X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Nov 2020 17:10:58 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_9E2786FA-82FA-488B-913C-26F3189588FC Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Not sure what we should cover in the meeting really. I=E2=80=99m wondering if there is a quorum since it has been hard for = people to find time to work on this so far. Or maybe there=E2=80=99s a = bunch of eager volunteers currently lurking in the shadows? We *could* talk about the writing/review process. We *could* talk about how conservative we=E2=80=99ll be with respect to = new features, but that discussion will probably need to be repeated on = the mailing list anyway. Glyn > On 30 Oct 2020, at 23:05, Tim Bray wrote: >=20 > Hello! I'm Tim Bray; your co-chairs are James Gruessing and me. This = is from both of us. >=20 > We=E2=80=99ll be virtually meeting Nov. 16th at this time: = https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=3DJSONPath+WG+IE= TF+109+Session&iso=3D20201116T16&p1=3D28&ah=3D2 = >=20 > This will be inconvenient for quite a lot of us, but just fine for our = Asian colleagues who normally are the ones struggling out of bed in the = middle of the night. =20 >=20 > Fairly-urgent action item: Agenda. We need to have our draft agenda = submitted next Wednesday and finalized on the ninth. Please post any = items to this mailing list. >=20 > Work is proceeding to get us a GitHub repo where draft specs and = related material can be posted and diffed and PR'ed.=20 >=20 > I=E2=80=99d like to offer a reading list that I think people should = glance over to get themselves equipped to participate in this work. > Our charter: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-jsonpath/ = > Stefan G=C3=B6ssner's original "XPath for JSON" write-up that is the = only existing spec of any kind: https://goessner.net/articles/JsonPath/ = > An Internet-Draft from Stefan and Carsten Bormann which IETF-izes = Stefan's original draft and is designed to launch this discussion: = https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-goessner-dispatch-jsonpath-00.html = = > Another Internet-draft style document from Normington, Surov, and = Mikulicic, with the goal of specifying JSONPath: = https://jsonpath-standard.github.io/internet-draft/ = > "JSONPath Comparison", a comparison by Christoph Burgmer of many = different JSONPath implementations and how they handle various JSONPath = idioms: https://cburgmer.github.io/json-path-comparison/ = - fabulous work! > In case that document looks way too big and intimidating, an example = of one of its detail pages: Bracket notation with dot: = https://cburgmer.github.io/json-path-comparison/results/bracket_notation_w= ith_dot.html = > For those of you who are new-ish to the IETF, an excellent write-up of = how things work: https://www.ietf.org/about/participate/tao = > Mark Pilgrim's classic "Why specs matter": = https://web.archive.org/web/20051016203842/http://diveintomark.org/archive= s/2004/08/16/specs = - it's short, to the point, and explains why good = specifications need to be full of illustrative examples. > --=20 > Jsonpath mailing list > Jsonpath@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonpath --Apple-Mail=_9E2786FA-82FA-488B-913C-26F3189588FC Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Not = sure what we should cover in the meeting really.

I=E2=80=99m wondering if there is a = quorum since it has been hard for people to find time to work on this so = far. Or maybe there=E2=80=99s a bunch of eager volunteers currently = lurking in the shadows?

We *could* talk about the writing/review process.

We *could* talk about = how conservative we=E2=80=99ll be with respect to new features, but that = discussion will probably need to be repeated on the mailing list = anyway.

Glyn

On 30 Oct 2020, at 23:05, Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com> wrote:

Hello! I'm Tim Bray; your co-chairs are = James Gruessing and me. This is from both of us.

We=E2=80=99ll be = virtually meeting Nov. 16th at this time: https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=3DJSO= NPath+WG+IETF+109+Session&iso=3D20201116T16&p1=3D28&ah=3D2=

This will be inconvenient for quite a lot of us, = but just fine for our Asian colleagues who normally are the ones = struggling out of bed in the middle of the night.  

Fairly-urgent action item: Agenda.  We need = to have our draft agenda submitted next Wednesday and finalized on the = ninth.  Please post any items to this mailing list.

Work is proceeding to get us a GitHub repo where = draft specs and related material can be posted and diffed and = PR'ed. 

I=E2=80=99d like to offer = a reading list that I think people should glance over to get themselves = equipped to participate in this work.
  1. Our charter: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-jsonpath/
  2. Stefan G=C3=B6ssner's = original "XPath for JSON" write-up that is the only existing spec of any = kind: https://goessner.net/articles/JsonPath/
  3. An Internet-Draft from Stefan and = Carsten Bormann which IETF-izes Stefan's original draft and is designed = to launch this discussion: https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-goessner-dispatch-jsonpat= h-00.html
  4. Another = Internet-draft style document from Normington, Surov, = and Mikulicic, with the goal of specifying JSONPath: https://jsonpath-standard.github.io/internet-draft/
    5. "JSONPath Comparison", a = comparison by Christoph Burgmer of many different JSONPath = implementations and how they handle various JSONPath idioms: https://cburgmer.github.io/json-path-comparison/ - = fabulous work!
  5. In case = that document looks way too big and intimidating, an example of one of = its detail pages: Bracket notation with dot: https://cburgmer.github.io/json-path-comparison/results/bracket= _notation_with_dot.html
  6. For those of you who are new-ish to the IETF, an excellent = write-up of how things work: https://www.ietf.org/about/participate/tao
  7. Mark Pilgrim's classic "Why specs = matter": https://web.archive.org/web/20051016203842/http://diveintomark.= org/archives/2004/08/16/specs - it's short, to the point, and = explains why good specifications need to be full of illustrative = examples.
--
Jsonpath mailing list
Jsonpath@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonpath

= --Apple-Mail=_9E2786FA-82FA-488B-913C-26F3189588FC-- From nobody Mon Nov 2 09:53:43 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 010EB3A0EF8 for ; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 09:53:42 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.897 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UBobP04ckj3C for ; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 09:53:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 29AE63A12BB for ; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 09:53:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.217.118] (p548dcc60.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.141.204.96]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4CQ0rX5VPkzyTm; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 18:53:16 +0100 (CET) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\)) From: Carsten Bormann In-Reply-To: Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2020 18:53:16 +0100 Cc: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 626032396.303476-c5f7254950f50f844b3f2de0e4d8d38b Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <2EFFF50D-F630-4E03-B7BE-B7E88B987BD9@tzi.org> References: To: Glyn Normington X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] Firing up the jsonpath working group X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Nov 2020 17:53:42 -0000 > We *could* talk about the writing/review process. Yes. It is probably easier to discuss this in a high-bandwidth meeting = than to fire out dozens of emails. > We *could* talk about how conservative we=E2=80=99ll be with respect = to new features, but that discussion will probably need to be repeated = on the mailing list anyway. That (=E2=80=9Cconservative=E2=80=9D) may be just one metric we could = use to describe the process. I think we should do this less from a 30000 foot, nebularly descriptive = point of view, but by looking at specific examples. If you already know = examples that could be controversial, please make then available as = GitHub issues (e.g., on your draft, or on the other one). Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten >=20 > Glyn >=20 >> On 30 Oct 2020, at 23:05, Tim Bray wrote: >>=20 >> Hello! I'm Tim Bray; your co-chairs are James Gruessing and me. This = is from both of us. >>=20 >> We=E2=80=99ll be virtually meeting Nov. 16th at this time: = https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=3DJSONPath+WG+IE= TF+109+Session&iso=3D20201116T16&p1=3D28&ah=3D2 >>=20 >> This will be inconvenient for quite a lot of us, but just fine for = our Asian colleagues who normally are the ones struggling out of bed in = the middle of the night. =20 >>=20 >> Fairly-urgent action item: Agenda. We need to have our draft agenda = submitted next Wednesday and finalized on the ninth. Please post any = items to this mailing list. >>=20 >> Work is proceeding to get us a GitHub repo where draft specs and = related material can be posted and diffed and PR'ed.=20 >>=20 >> I=E2=80=99d like to offer a reading list that I think people should = glance over to get themselves equipped to participate in this work. >> =E2=80=A2 Our charter: = https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-jsonpath/ >> =E2=80=A2 Stefan G=C3=B6ssner's original "XPath for JSON" = write-up that is the only existing spec of any kind: = https://goessner.net/articles/JsonPath/ >> =E2=80=A2 An Internet-Draft from Stefan and Carsten Bormann = which IETF-izes Stefan's original draft and is designed to launch this = discussion: = https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-goessner-dispatch-jsonpath-00.html >> =E2=80=A2 Another Internet-draft style document from Normington, = Surov, and Mikulicic, with the goal of specifying JSONPath: = https://jsonpath-standard.github.io/internet-draft/ >> =E2=80=A2 "JSONPath Comparison", a comparison by Christoph = Burgmer of many different JSONPath implementations and how they handle = various JSONPath idioms: = https://cburgmer.github.io/json-path-comparison/ - fabulous work! >> =E2=80=A2 In case that document looks way too big and = intimidating, an example of one of its detail pages: Bracket notation = with dot: = https://cburgmer.github.io/json-path-comparison/results/bracket_notation_w= ith_dot.html >> =E2=80=A2 For those of you who are new-ish to the IETF, an = excellent write-up of how things work: = https://www.ietf.org/about/participate/tao >> =E2=80=A2 Mark Pilgrim's classic "Why specs matter": = https://web.archive.org/web/20051016203842/http://diveintomark.org/archive= s/2004/08/16/specs - it's short, to the point, and explains why good = specifications need to be full of illustrative examples. >> --=20 >> Jsonpath mailing list >> Jsonpath@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonpath >=20 > --=20 > Jsonpath mailing list > Jsonpath@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonpath From nobody Wed Nov 4 07:38:42 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E93C83A0C9A for ; Wed, 4 Nov 2020 07:38:40 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id m3nI7nFDHufZ for ; Wed, 4 Nov 2020 07:38:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wr1-x434.google.com (mail-wr1-x434.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::434]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 80DCC3A0365 for ; Wed, 4 Nov 2020 07:38:36 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wr1-x434.google.com with SMTP id w1so22568127wrm.4 for ; Wed, 04 Nov 2020 07:38:36 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=7r/Bq0yRX43YMk+RNWFsW43YehWT8xldeitDoLil3EA=; b=feva4rNvr6NIrMpsvjmaV3jMCFShVIMdU1ByiwkpYax+9EdsMJbwdaT4JxbpIMBNnK dZagMLeq/FJ1RFBzHGWwF9m/CCR5csstij1QZH9ctBiH+81veeRtQeXA+M1vtlCPSyL4 s7uQ87E1iQSBpaCGTL/uUpOqJDazQoXTzFImC/9AtTp6gOkiq4UjXD0Fi9XZq3tbA0cL QTAeK7Sj9LkBIXwBYZPqjBKRhTbziYUrX5L104Hhlw4uEVeZy98gQJNldfFP1twgIME/ U5VtOLSXVmYlMluDUV9q3OJLnh9UZBRVRDduNl29bUQgYXoqZ1jzi0InOv8fmJqVgHJ5 51Ag== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=7r/Bq0yRX43YMk+RNWFsW43YehWT8xldeitDoLil3EA=; b=E9OHLIDA4V6H0OImmw32k5iha0lRtfYl+i1BvbjyMrS0kU1ott1p+rybo3RGUyicst GxBnc3cQGYocsapzOb86I2ktL2X20f9tyTyjTkY+ccuLVKnDTeawCJ0G2Xfb9l31P+MH ifakngYtPRWpMeba/w3RitkbT4slUGmMeLcYyRUpkWZCCiGH4rjwzNyNg5ErHETiduGk mqHrlWJBwY203XVun5X09bLdouMtR/sdCJvtCH/lhgKmMyQRcgy7idPxpcSnvNYmDGi1 bs8cJKyL3RsVbSsjqo5PFlMJ2GrgMx3bzD4zk30sGaNG1EDqVzxEbF6UGIrQk5B50f/c 7O1w== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530IRmQlxNqHmWH23X9p/VNaUmnBI9gfe/Q6TZxcnP1gNitemxUR J8AQe+C8yueuX90uqI/YIUXnKULc90Ajy6I8 X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJw8FQIlQJrOeittcJpCiI+ogzW1tMUAgl+0yJQ1JkVEWMDbM7FsEsLgo2izb7Zhi+p9iFufNw== X-Received: by 2002:adf:8b15:: with SMTP id n21mr34365815wra.313.1604504314617; Wed, 04 Nov 2020 07:38:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.97] (8.144.199.146.dyn.plus.net. [146.199.144.8]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id f1sm2659760wmj.3.2020.11.04.07.38.33 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 04 Nov 2020 07:38:33 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\)) From: Glyn Normington In-Reply-To: <2EFFF50D-F630-4E03-B7BE-B7E88B987BD9@tzi.org> Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 15:38:32 +0000 Cc: jsonpath@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <871BE908-2710-47C4-B3E0-689DBEF4B3A6@gmail.com> References: <2EFFF50D-F630-4E03-B7BE-B7E88B987BD9@tzi.org> To: Carsten Bormann X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] Firing up the jsonpath working group X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 04 Nov 2020 15:38:41 -0000 On 2 Nov 2020, at 17:53, Carsten Bormann wrote: > <=E2=80=A6> >> We *could* talk about how conservative we=E2=80=99ll be with respect = to new features, but that discussion will probably need to be repeated = on the mailing list anyway. >=20 > That (=E2=80=9Cconservative=E2=80=9D) may be just one metric we could = use to describe the process. > I think we should do this less from a 30000 foot, nebularly = descriptive point of view, but by looking at specific examples. If you = already know examples that could be controversial, please make then = available as GitHub issues (e.g., on your draft, or on the other one). The following issues are suitably controversial: * Script expressions: = https://github.com/jsonpath-standard/internet-draft/issues/17 * Ordering of results: = https://github.com/jsonpath-standard/internet-draft/issues/27 * Removal of duplicates from results: = https://github.com/jsonpath-standard/internet-draft/issues/23 > <=E2=80=A6> From nobody Thu Nov 5 03:14:32 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 526523A175F for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 03:14:30 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.898 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EHF9EPktqlSi for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 03:14:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9D7D83A1766 for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 03:14:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.217.118] (p548dcc60.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.141.204.96]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4CRgrw1mhkzybr; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 12:14:24 +0100 (CET) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\)) From: Carsten Bormann In-Reply-To: <871BE908-2710-47C4-B3E0-689DBEF4B3A6@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 12:14:23 +0100 Cc: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 626267663.66752-ec75435eab80bd23eaad6b37efbc533a Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <2EFFF50D-F630-4E03-B7BE-B7E88B987BD9@tzi.org> <871BE908-2710-47C4-B3E0-689DBEF4B3A6@gmail.com> To: Glyn Normington X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] Firing up the jsonpath working group X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2020 11:14:31 -0000 >=20 > The following issues are suitably controversial: >=20 > * Script expressions: = https://github.com/jsonpath-standard/internet-draft/issues/17 Great discussion, with some (too trivial though) examples. What=E2=80=99s missing is essentially a feel for the landscape (what is = being used) and an assessment of the impact of supporting that. Can we have some of this ready for consumption before the WG meeting? > * Ordering of results: = https://github.com/jsonpath-standard/internet-draft/issues/27 What is a CTS? (It seems to me that this issue is a no-brainer, but that may be my = personal bias.) > * Removal of duplicates from results: = https://github.com/jsonpath-standard/internet-draft/issues/23 (Ditto.) The underlying problem here is that of a missing model. XPath has nodesets, and we probably need something like that. Sorting/deduplicating results by deep structural equivalence sounds like = a non-starter, so the answer for 23 should be ["string", null, false, = "string=E2=80=9D]. So maybe do #29 first. https://github.com/cburgmer/json-path-comparison/issues/29 (There is no real difference between returning JSON pointers and JSON = paths, that is just a minor syntax detail of the API.) Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten From nobody Thu Nov 5 04:18:08 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE7EB3A17B0 for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 04:18:07 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.097 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DILkxNF5pMa2 for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 04:18:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wr1-x433.google.com (mail-wr1-x433.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::433]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 621A83A17B1 for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 04:18:02 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wr1-x433.google.com with SMTP id c17so1490849wrc.11 for ; Thu, 05 Nov 2020 04:18:02 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=LHzLflvBqPAZ/yEdbhqtvg7cZE6b125c6eDt392FNhw=; b=M6aRcKVw65l5bmbZBzE4aJsY0zUoetspD87b67/R6Ik914xoAHNBW9X7H/vooKmsh6 wwKsNWEBr2RqJ+AByZkdX4Wyv4oVGqocSffArN+sO4lChHESuQyXF0h1uaX5NOwxV3jY c3hL1bCYZrO+8+dyOApzFEFAvQucpaGOnOH3P8W1LmksXsFSOdknC7VEn30s3E8nfwoS 7Il9IXGpiUIzLDDdicUYN/VrUR/3YxWMlHXT8viOdzLg25fPGCUX9c0Ttz3GcIa47ctb /eV8qXlWfqjnoSGHdTztQ2/ehyGlDIP7ho/mjuV3Z+KMDbLhbRjmiGi8Zz2tum6P3yvn 9Gvg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=LHzLflvBqPAZ/yEdbhqtvg7cZE6b125c6eDt392FNhw=; b=lptCE62bfLgEcUcWilB+3I7LLH/oYrdoQYUcEWeZWz/ohYKSnFM5iuYcDLyJlRkD3s LX5of0+peY9mL8rgdwzmsXuAR/O9+dYEfq/Vfrnk2wUlhgRuOxZC5uXyYvKi2bTC71aL TwhF8t9xfkYRd7+Tx8BVu9KY0XcLlM6rqXc1xw0+MTzhEXa9rxIp/6f/fIff238V2VoW pYl3C2ypzIsokPpL+s5ve9A3tjgihSeWkBhdWCABaK9PAlUnF+LNpABofCoWKhek4Yp5 aH1UIiWFac3ycBlS+CXZoxJYqFKg20hDfrmGhhdxjglgTOnO3osBJ4yp9WDGN1EzXgoT vtqw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM53338PUD5vHvaJvWBYX2r9fSdCDYEy5fgXX+G/NXy8Rp5jKw6NiI Rqy9s/mpw94CsXDzQ2SlPyw= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwNYbx2CbLwsqqdXxxlarsxRSuaPuvQuaaIUCnt36BAAZX+jMQlA1UxMnSuBahLUkpS9Yg/Vg== X-Received: by 2002:adf:dc4b:: with SMTP id m11mr2517303wrj.328.1604578680172; Thu, 05 Nov 2020 04:18:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.97] (8.144.199.146.dyn.plus.net. [146.199.144.8]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id e5sm2076705wrw.93.2020.11.05.04.17.59 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 05 Nov 2020 04:17:59 -0800 (PST) From: Glyn Normington Message-Id: <97AD4D7F-DAD5-4F1A-97A3-43123E87038A@gmail.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_261851F8-EB28-4D17-887D-6D8FDA3D992B" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\)) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 12:17:58 +0000 In-Reply-To: Cc: jsonpath@ietf.org To: Carsten Bormann References: <2EFFF50D-F630-4E03-B7BE-B7E88B987BD9@tzi.org> <871BE908-2710-47C4-B3E0-689DBEF4B3A6@gmail.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] Firing up the jsonpath working group X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2020 12:18:08 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_261851F8-EB28-4D17-887D-6D8FDA3D992B Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 On 5 Nov 2020, at 11:14, Carsten Bormann wrote: >=20 >>=20 >> The following issues are suitably controversial: >>=20 >> * Script expressions: = https://github.com/jsonpath-standard/internet-draft/issues/17 >=20 > Great discussion, with some (too trivial though) examples. > What=E2=80=99s missing is essentially a feel for the landscape (what = is being used) and an assessment of the impact of supporting that. > Can we have some of this ready for consumption before the WG meeting? I put together this survey from various implementations: = https://github.com/jsonpath-standard/internet-draft/issues/17#issuecomment= -722341797 = (I don=E2=80=99t know about actual usage) >=20 >> * Ordering of results: = https://github.com/jsonpath-standard/internet-draft/issues/27 >=20 > What is a CTS? Compliance Test Suite. One starting point for a CTS is here (although it = needs moving to its own repository for ease of consumption): = https://github.com/jsonpath-standard/jsonpath-reference-implementation/blo= b/main/tests/cts.json > (It seems to me that this issue is a no-brainer, but that may be my = personal bias.) >=20 >> * Removal of duplicates from results: = https://github.com/jsonpath-standard/internet-draft/issues/23 >=20 > (Ditto.) >=20 > The underlying problem here is that of a missing model. > XPath has nodesets, and we probably need something like that. > Sorting/deduplicating results by deep structural equivalence sounds = like a non-starter, so the answer for 23 should be ["string", null, = false, "string=E2=80=9D]. >=20 > So maybe do #29 first. > https://github.com/cburgmer/json-path-comparison/issues/29 > (There is no real difference between returning JSON pointers and JSON = paths, that is just a minor syntax detail of the API.) >=20 > Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten >=20 --Apple-Mail=_261851F8-EB28-4D17-887D-6D8FDA3D992B Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 On = 5 Nov 2020, at 11:14, Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> wrote:

(I don=E2=80= =99t know about actual usage)


(It seems to me = that this issue is a no-brainer, but that may be my personal bias.)

* Removal = of duplicates from results: https://github.com/jsonpath-standard/internet-draft/issues/23

(Ditto.)

The underlying problem here is that of a missing model.
XPath has nodesets, and we probably need something like = that.
Sorting/deduplicating results by deep structural = equivalence sounds like a non-starter, so the answer for 23 should be = ["string", null, false, "string=E2=80=9D].

So= maybe do #29 first.
https://github.com/cburgmer/json-path-comparison/issues/29<= br class=3D"">(There is no real difference between returning JSON = pointers and JSON paths, that is just a minor syntax detail of the = API.)

Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten


= --Apple-Mail=_261851F8-EB28-4D17-887D-6D8FDA3D992B-- From nobody Thu Nov 5 12:22:36 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F7043A1A2D for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 12:22:34 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.898 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=textuality-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Pq6DULfcT9ea for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 12:22:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-lf1-x136.google.com (mail-lf1-x136.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::136]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 78A2E3A1A2C for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 12:22:32 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-lf1-x136.google.com with SMTP id h6so4177350lfj.3 for ; Thu, 05 Nov 2020 12:22:32 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=textuality-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=PTH07iXIFOzVQb1nXV86Qqs/fEic/PsI8P+rfUboU24=; b=RoYKAJcVDDT4QiJD1cGjEvGbFmmEVKtS8hL+28Gmb69AK9uaIo7NpF/E0Rkgr2RmMm +N0szVlHK3NcO4H3htPLnGsDIqY9hEi7ILoks+8aqLXzYgCc5sWNd3NLRi4NawVSxfvW 5L/CGbWYC4wBHHJzgTDiIgtcPDipO8xqXksYasJjfW15rY9GuscQxadKorvJ/IwB1nir kkipRf7FasSStOMKX4g2af6z/BHm65ScV4gGmyyeg0QgmSLfcrLYrN/T7zPxw+b+b9zy KzRSPiq25cM0rTfJ2nZlTU18vTLlMfKXKrWT9D5UEVx79+qQUay0BryXMmvZzvqCQqgO NRng== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=PTH07iXIFOzVQb1nXV86Qqs/fEic/PsI8P+rfUboU24=; b=UvZK2kCYKKsekcmyAkEG2UbCNq7FM37KpE5ySRGnpRFnd6c3sXywdRkjI8fx/m6WTH GFjagMlR9rl0JlT+wn3PZo+uHV+qWi+1qFZKXh+nABtOtOQUbQNA7J8p3aAtErFZQaIo XaaHAXd7XbAJgMNbU4Au6HK0ucmpljBpSmDyM/luUai84hLVQyq1Y/DcLfyK//EbwXSr uDu3NLNeLPsqZ2RQclbacAGughW0KFyelCAX+/XfKb3tZTtC5qv9OCXN0ITwkRYbdMpj tUQcB+cj/fF0CWitZU3welKs5ZoGbRmUQeopFi8vyMMI/bkMb7gGCUWYw0ftYcORSQ29 huWw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530e7aJ/ZtNhix4vdJqZp+tmIpXg/v66FlbHzZ6orc/0xC7+FPQJ SM7nVVbAI6NduW8cUzl+2XYz5bFAO+n306sdyk64RERXXn4= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwYGy+zZO4inQobf24FhhXX06GDjK1R8ObJ0A37cEkTp1UrxvHvQ+hZ/v2jW4GlDFVO1BQdvHMZvbuQE9eNit0= X-Received: by 2002:a19:c6cc:: with SMTP id w195mr1707832lff.24.1604607750488; Thu, 05 Nov 2020 12:22:30 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <2EFFF50D-F630-4E03-B7BE-B7E88B987BD9@tzi.org> <871BE908-2710-47C4-B3E0-689DBEF4B3A6@gmail.com> <97AD4D7F-DAD5-4F1A-97A3-43123E87038A@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <97AD4D7F-DAD5-4F1A-97A3-43123E87038A@gmail.com> From: Tim Bray Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 12:22:19 -0800 Message-ID: To: Glyn Normington Cc: Carsten Bormann , jsonpath@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000f8df4b05b361dac1" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] Firing up the jsonpath working group X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2020 20:22:34 -0000 --000000000000f8df4b05b361dac1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Yeah, please feel free to raise any issues right now on mailing-list threads with useful subject lines right here. Any discussions we can have before our Nov 16 will probably add to the quality of that meeting. We may discover huge areas of disagreement and those real-time synchronous meetings are very useful for addressing those. On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 4:18 AM Glyn Normington wrote: > On 5 Nov 2020, at 11:14, Carsten Bormann wrote: > > > > The following issues are suitably controversial: > > * Script expressions: > https://github.com/jsonpath-standard/internet-draft/issues/17 > > > Great discussion, with some (too trivial though) examples. > What=E2=80=99s missing is essentially a feel for the landscape (what is b= eing > used) and an assessment of the impact of supporting that. > Can we have some of this ready for consumption before the WG meeting? > > > I put together this survey from various implementations: > https://github.com/jsonpath-standard/internet-draft/issues/17#issuecommen= t-722341797 > > (I don=E2=80=99t know about actual usage) > > > * Ordering of results: > https://github.com/jsonpath-standard/internet-draft/issues/27 > > > What is a CTS? > > > Compliance Test Suite. One starting point for a CTS is here (although it > needs moving to its own repository for ease of consumption): > > > https://github.com/jsonpath-standard/jsonpath-reference-implementation/bl= ob/main/tests/cts.json > > (It seems to me that this issue is a no-brainer, but that may be my > personal bias.) > > * Removal of duplicates from results: > https://github.com/jsonpath-standard/internet-draft/issues/23 > > > (Ditto.) > > The underlying problem here is that of a missing model. > XPath has nodesets, and we probably need something like that. > Sorting/deduplicating results by deep structural equivalence sounds like = a > non-starter, so the answer for 23 should be ["string", null, false, > "string=E2=80=9D]. > > So maybe do #29 first. > https://github.com/cburgmer/json-path-comparison/issues/29 > (There is no real difference between returning JSON pointers and JSON > paths, that is just a minor syntax detail of the API.) > > Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten > > > -- > Jsonpath mailing list > Jsonpath@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonpath > --000000000000f8df4b05b361dac1 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Yea= h, please feel free to raise any issues right now on mailing-list threads w= ith useful subject lines right here.=C2=A0 Any discussions we can have befo= re our Nov 16 will probably add to the quality of that meeting. We may disc= over huge areas of disagreement and those real-time synchronous meetings ar= e very useful for addressing those.

On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 4:18 AM Gly= n Normington <glyn.normingt= on@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5 Nov 2020, at 11:14, Carste= n Bormann <cabo@tzi.or= g> wrote:


The following issues are suitably controversial:
* Script expressions: https://github.com/jsonpath-standar= d/internet-draft/issues/17

Great discussion, with s= ome (too trivial though) examples.
What=E2=80=99s missing is essentially= a feel for the landscape (what is being used) and an assessment of the imp= act of supporting that.
Can we have some of this ready for consumption b= efore the WG meeting?

I put toge= ther this survey from various implementations:=C2=A0https://github.com/jsonpath-standard/internet-draft/issues= /17#issuecomment-722341797

(I don=E2=80=99t kn= ow about actual usage)


Compliance Te= st Suite. One starting point for a CTS is here (although it needs moving to= its own repository for ease of consumption):

https://github.com/jsonpath-= standard/jsonpath-reference-implementation/blob/main/tests/cts.json

(It seems to me that this is= sue is a no-brainer, but that may be my personal bias.)

* Removal of duplicates from results: https:= //github.com/jsonpath-standard/internet-draft/issues/23

(Ditto.)

The underlying problem here is that of a missing model= .
XPath has nodesets, and we probably need something like that.
Sorti= ng/deduplicating results by deep structural equivalence sounds like a non-s= tarter, so the answer for 23 should be ["string", null, false, &q= uot;string=E2=80=9D].

So maybe do #29 first.
https:= //github.com/cburgmer/json-path-comparison/issues/29
(There is no re= al difference between returning JSON pointers and JSON paths, that is just = a minor syntax detail of the API.)

Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten

<= /div>

--
Jsonpath mailing list
Jsonpath@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonpath
--000000000000f8df4b05b361dac1-- From nobody Thu Nov 5 13:49:44 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C5A6A3A1AB7 for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 13:49:36 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.099 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id M0UwVvXaCAd7 for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 13:49:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wm1-x32e.google.com (mail-wm1-x32e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::32e]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 01AF43A1AC0 for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 13:49:32 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wm1-x32e.google.com with SMTP id p19so1989890wmg.0 for ; Thu, 05 Nov 2020 13:49:32 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=clE3dVdXu9TI2VeiM/hzJnYGAFz+o9KJ5F1n51cQS5E=; b=q9jBGRA6AifhnEVcDs6n+T5h1JidGHAX/o43Naum/gh4nrJpLmwp/WBo03LvAyr/8m eG05t3ldMZ0U400HnvyR1O7hslF/g+8KOvee6hRoM7ruU7pE/zggV90sATyVpkcYHyla q5Sgj1cdzXNK1g3Uq2HC+ukYNVL9yc7ZisdoRkQGmuCgxm7r2tEJW1KSGeRgxX4JCmxm QhGaAp0IcPWtTLWe+xDKus4ZFzQ6TgK4JJtryQlVKw94h9WjTYMFpLjBxYjr5JiEcYkv P5jYe7nOEdeLUtNJ2E7Ins8Dtr1FdlDpvtM8txdIlDCY8WYeeCHf9/8fiMsvgQK47koS JF0w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=clE3dVdXu9TI2VeiM/hzJnYGAFz+o9KJ5F1n51cQS5E=; b=Ht0sV00qHfT/wcqmoW6nXM/Hvhn2++jF+ZyOgOZ0CvGFM3SMkYIvXTgakX6TzVOprn itnx1t18XS65r/Yb0azmEsV0eW7kiqna4TN7AGJp3OR+lFyJvI9pfh05R8pHbk6ineE9 +8XNnQIRg0xWQhyI9fxdXxcEWKWyFM6JU+5OOhvNuub2o7R8DFjCEUJvg5muDj4BdIk8 E0mSVKTQIfnZoesh6UhwOdbgvwak1uPiw15CNJPG2Cburd9UvWx0chj4104VIsixsEtF RvTXnkC6q0OBYe/QaFqllmgFFkFwTiA529DaIvEXXuV6mVyhV350mqlOdrFfbh5Q/QNr cETQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533RqyDs4mT90sn4sBeNTR1JhoqWV1DqGFNIsntOpYCS+3X/hj58 qJEURceydSimXvXaxnAhhAuy96u/Ba3GWxbPlCmvOd4TXoG7jg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxJgnoKKCtq4exyR6l26j0Yl0EI1veLkodN9RtdpFSDMmb9OOt+WgFBAs1CfWSCyq9J2NyxaJDYPJ0KDlyzZjE= X-Received: by 2002:a7b:cb46:: with SMTP id v6mr4640226wmj.159.1604612970967; Thu, 05 Nov 2020 13:49:30 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Daniel P Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 16:49:18 -0500 Message-ID: To: jsonpath@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Archived-At: Subject: [Jsonpath] Controversial issues X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2020 21:49:42 -0000 From: Glyn Normington > > The following issues are suitably controversial: > * Removal of duplicates from results: https://github.com/jsonpath-standard/internet- > draft/issues/23 I don't think any implementation would remove duplicates from a path such as "$.store.book". I believe this is only somewhat controversial in the context of unions [,]. The name "union" suggests that distinct values be returned, compare with SQL unions. But Stefan Goessner's implementation doesn't do that, it concatenates all results that meet each criteria. There are a few JSONPath implementations that produce real unions with no duplicates instead of concatenated results, but I don't think that's the consensus. Daniel From nobody Thu Nov 5 15:10:22 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB1493A0147 for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 15:10:20 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3iqtvo9Pnga2 for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 15:10:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wr1-x436.google.com (mail-wr1-x436.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::436]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6C4A13A0138 for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 15:10:19 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wr1-x436.google.com with SMTP id p1so3610362wrf.12 for ; Thu, 05 Nov 2020 15:10:19 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=u3kIAaebyayehxhYAVNnz+lljuVenkxksNHeemispKc=; b=SJsVD98TQBl8TCfgXmBQumnd57XpbBUL8agljmvwLlIGXMhR/y+j3x2wll/GSQ6mrg p6YLgPsJ2bfEj5SFMY4pnp2KQ0GWD7JOcJ+sena0STTI+0tLg++5CPOJEIyTmceP0o/5 3N4TP1cO20+O3u276DCCvR+lKX7+O/kCukGByc9YHI4VPCWylM44iKQfElWMh18eErqZ rmQ6eAj/pHT4IScz2ot3hO1BQ/FY6gaog46rywVVmTsAH+QXmw/MRpOm2yDY4YqpVS8O ht8VXd8zHNkBOlRDBILy25qMcfts4/UbfhACkofbMf89SxBIayUHf4n1FHqlztnGac5C 5ZlA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=u3kIAaebyayehxhYAVNnz+lljuVenkxksNHeemispKc=; b=kOje1it7W9R7P1qqq3ePeSnoZyWtUFaqktHiEznAPdIga+/saxPp8bB15VITvd9HTL Cm0ia3BtbzCuS/iqjkp32YWkOqpBPkK58Host0tH+xAh2qhyjIQCk4NJBKXWMOZ8HRkZ xWFx23lxNvqrwgpoQ4EL/JhzFVt4p0B84YkIzDhyAwgK4Hphl5KSNAbBKmDNzZ4oUlmL F6AVVWheVSe8ORqrtp7h0+ekOpUaBhVa151IV7V+Gk1gh1L1jxKW77+lviOkN2wSLE4e nYu0vr389IAsEr6qnBe49XvJhg6hjTf13bQ5EtlPQMIsEFZcFnqvcnOi8HHu5HKRqOfp QOZQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530peVZ2/+6gMNlnFA1kUPCT7EWlyYAb79FIyPnBSeqVGyLr+Tu6 CzEZQjNllFvVMZ6M0XMksC9i9kY1zymr3BoJjqu0nDByvrEdng== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJywJrewI8duyaSb0FO1829fHxHopkydNI/Lb7jvTK29qy2iZhQF6QhJ8yXF1RUtuYcB7tpmF7qzpURj0CE/C4w= X-Received: by 2002:adf:9066:: with SMTP id h93mr5892059wrh.166.1604617817639; Thu, 05 Nov 2020 15:10:17 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Daniel P Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 18:10:05 -0500 Message-ID: To: jsonpath@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] Controversial issues X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2020 23:10:21 -0000 On 5 Nov 2020, at 11:14, Carsten Bormann wrote: > The underlying problem here is that of a missing model. > XPath has nodesets, and we probably need something like that. Unlike XPath, where an expression can return items that are not XML documents, a JSONPath expression can only return JSON values, and a collection of JSON values can be returned in a JSON array value. Consequently, introducing the idea of node-sets into JSONPath would seem to serve no purpose. Daniel From nobody Thu Nov 5 15:19:23 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 197BC3A03F2 for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 15:19:22 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.898 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=textuality-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id oHli_N4NMzHO for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 15:19:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-lf1-x136.google.com (mail-lf1-x136.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::136]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 259DC3A03F1 for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 15:19:20 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-lf1-x136.google.com with SMTP id i6so4784089lfd.1 for ; Thu, 05 Nov 2020 15:19:19 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=textuality-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=w4gEA7YWFXJ41GJRn9gBuS8Q6tC7SnP1Vb2cwpQySVo=; b=bn9QrV1bNum5wsfegCIoocJeplytH+tE3cHhlmSgRq8ceywZ3zHL/1TzYSR35GM+k1 9Kn9XV5xJQY3v9vWZuZ+rkV2ljOcZ4gYnFrQpwPAeds6rzg0xah52TxFh8+WaR/abqkn iSJBg3iXapoeyaBDTVPtNVXXEyCb6SLZ+Ed3Qb6u27AdJDmDVRN4tahxJIkFupK8Deho qeTmjtjrs7Mt3PNL94zVggrHfPdZPVCGWTiBtuzal9BJmBSPJtcVfigMy8Rcy/UW1En0 Jssev5nnPDVr/mzoUD6WKuesm4eBMWB8lDPlJ2khGICt79dI27pnCQjyw0HzTXhnA60f Moyg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=w4gEA7YWFXJ41GJRn9gBuS8Q6tC7SnP1Vb2cwpQySVo=; b=B8v2Q4HH1wofuahpbpG5yBnPTYxXfp1QnCw95FqbqO0vmNopDL6lTtk48CZQNaMdqG diWZ/A4jnOEzTX2F6gCXrrz4tSv0YkBhUHcr7/0fwfSTzhjj8qmJHH4+Q0N0xvTx6JO7 51Vl0SHnui61Jpy8stcn43+KgOLvem0CeGM6CLxvfOKsyYP6PzZcTEDARhNg2MlbTy3T AAaVFDsdwkoUjUh/Zkv55lpH3+EWHJ3Tfng2FST/0XfU80LOFjUgSqZ822i3dOVcKNIL 10fNag5uSwe52AN05Ksn8TW5eAva+7ZnWvnpG7az5xpm09Ni6dC9nvZ8sfl3O7x+KZXb Dr2Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533fe8XFsREHtGULHpC/kGLCk1lpe/6u7IS3lfbyVvQ/Mp6vbRUq 7yybj054/3toHO0npJuEGY9vzkRffpM4FvnyOcgNCg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwqSxptgsyMmCpN0tFZkuGxImiOH4zaX2zJO6hvwnL/m6uH5bBd7MpTWlMUdBRL2zQGxRjOMW8LBdwI2ju/c/M= X-Received: by 2002:ac2:46c3:: with SMTP id p3mr1816486lfo.565.1604618358109; Thu, 05 Nov 2020 15:19:18 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Tim Bray Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 15:19:07 -0800 Message-ID: To: Daniel P Cc: jsonpath@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000003c520605b3645356" Archived-At: Subject: [Jsonpath] Returning multiple values: (was Controversial issues) X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2020 23:19:22 -0000 --0000000000003c520605b3645356 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" In the heavily JSONPath-dependent app I most recently worked on, when applying a JSONPath returned multiple values, we exposed that as a JSON array. Not religious about this issue, but the return-an-array seemed to surprise nobody and make people happy. On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 3:10 PM Daniel P wrote: > On 5 Nov 2020, at 11:14, Carsten Bormann wrote: > > > The underlying problem here is that of a missing model. > > XPath has nodesets, and we probably need something like that. > > Unlike XPath, where an expression can return items that are > not XML documents, a JSONPath expression can only return > JSON values, and a collection of JSON values can be > returned in a JSON array value. Consequently, introducing > the idea of node-sets into JSONPath would seem to > serve no purpose. > > Daniel > > -- > Jsonpath mailing list > Jsonpath@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonpath > --0000000000003c520605b3645356 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
In the heavily JSONPath-dependent app I most recently worked = on, when applying a JSONPath returned multiple values, we exposed that as a= JSON array.=C2=A0 Not religious about this issue, but the=C2=A0return-an-a= rray seemed to surprise nobody and make people happy.

On Thu, Nov 5, 2= 020 at 3:10 PM Daniel P <dani= elaparker@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5 Nov 2020,= at 11:14, Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> wrote:

> The underlying problem here is that of a missing model.
> XPath has nodesets, and we probably need something like that.

Unlike XPath, where an expression can return items that are
not XML documents, a JSONPath expression can only return
JSON values, and a collection of JSON values can be
returned in a JSON array value. Consequently, introducing
the idea of node-sets into JSONPath would seem to
serve no purpose.

Daniel

--
Jsonpath mailing list
Jsonpath@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonpath
--0000000000003c520605b3645356-- From nobody Thu Nov 5 15:20:48 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13E4B3A0400 for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 15:20:47 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.896 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.896 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1JlW2GYE3AeE for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 15:20:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B84E43A03F8 for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 15:20:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.217.118] (p548dcc60.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.141.204.96]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4CRzyy70pVzySK; Fri, 6 Nov 2020 00:20:42 +0100 (CET) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\)) From: Carsten Bormann In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 00:20:42 +0100 Cc: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 626311242.583824-10f23be0d9125d4d19503fe75c93bfd4 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <906619DA-4C05-4C73-AE27-7AFEB03E8FEA@tzi.org> References: To: Daniel P X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] Controversial issues X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2020 23:20:47 -0000 On 2020-11-06, at 00:10, Daniel P wrote: >=20 > On 5 Nov 2020, at 11:14, Carsten Bormann wrote: >=20 >> The underlying problem here is that of a missing model. >> XPath has nodesets, and we probably need something like that. >=20 > Unlike XPath, where an expression can return items that are > not XML documents, a JSONPath expression can only return > JSON values, That may be trivially true, but these values can be values from the = input tree, or they can be positions in the tree. A set of positions is = very much like a node set. I was less interested in the output formats than in the information that = is kept as part of the processing model, and that might indeed also = include sets of positions. Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten > and a collection of JSON values can be > returned in a JSON array value. Consequently, introducing > the idea of node-sets into JSONPath would seem to > serve no purpose. >=20 > Daniel >=20 > --=20 > Jsonpath mailing list > Jsonpath@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonpath From nobody Thu Nov 5 15:24:07 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D22223A0408 for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 15:24:05 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.897 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wvmS3inJmdJ6 for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 15:24:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A91843A03F8 for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 15:24:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.217.118] (p548dcc60.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.141.204.96]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4CS02n5MrpzySK; Fri, 6 Nov 2020 00:24:01 +0100 (CET) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\)) From: Carsten Bormann In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 00:24:01 +0100 Cc: Daniel P , jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 626311441.411808-4053850d50ca160b57e22a9fe775078e Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <100E9E20-72B8-48D8-AAFB-3BC2B85C4456@tzi.org> References: To: Tim Bray X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] Returning multiple values: (was Controversial issues) X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2020 23:24:06 -0000 On 2020-11-06, at 00:19, Tim Bray wrote: >=20 > In the heavily JSONPath-dependent app I most recently worked on, when = applying a JSONPath returned multiple values, we exposed that as a JSON = array. Not religious about this issue, but the return-an-array seemed = to surprise nobody and make people happy. I wasn=E2=80=99t even aware that there is a question here. = https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-goessner-dispatch-jsonpath-00.html#n= ame-return-value (Clearly, I would get rid of the =E2=80=9Cfalse=E2=80=9D special case = =E2=80=94 an empty array is fine.) Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten >=20 > On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 3:10 PM Daniel P = wrote: > On 5 Nov 2020, at 11:14, Carsten Bormann wrote: >=20 > > The underlying problem here is that of a missing model. > > XPath has nodesets, and we probably need something like that. >=20 > Unlike XPath, where an expression can return items that are > not XML documents, a JSONPath expression can only return > JSON values, and a collection of JSON values can be > returned in a JSON array value. Consequently, introducing > the idea of node-sets into JSONPath would seem to > serve no purpose. >=20 > Daniel >=20 > --=20 > Jsonpath mailing list > Jsonpath@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonpath > --=20 > Jsonpath mailing list > Jsonpath@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonpath From nobody Thu Nov 5 15:35:52 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A3773A07B2 for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 15:35:51 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.895 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.895 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sBknRsN9_m-k for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 15:35:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from mailex.mailcore.me (mailex.mailcore.me [94.136.40.143]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7230A3A0773 for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 15:35:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from cpc160115-rdng30-2-0-cust150.15-3.cable.virginm.net ([86.19.35.151] helo=[192.168.0.27]) by smtp03.mailcore.me with esmtpa (Exim 4.92.3) (envelope-from ) id 1kaonA-0000uf-1O; Thu, 05 Nov 2020 23:35:44 +0000 From: Michael Kay Message-Id: <7EE36A14-0372-4C78-87E4-E79E240F3B09@saxonica.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_4E6AD8FD-081F-4A02-856A-285ABC025480" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.7\)) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 23:35:42 +0000 In-Reply-To: Cc: Daniel P , jsonpath@ietf.org To: Tim Bray References: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.7) X-Mailcore-Auth: 439400257 X-Mailcore-Domain: 1881035 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] Returning multiple values: (was Controversial issues) X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2020 23:35:51 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_4E6AD8FD-081F-4A02-856A-285ABC025480 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii >=20 > In the heavily JSONPath-dependent app I most recently worked on, when = applying a JSONPath returned multiple values, we exposed that as a JSON = array. Not religious about this issue, but the return-an-array seemed = to surprise nobody and make people happy. >=20 How does the receiving application determine whether a result of [1,2,3] = represents a single value retrieved from the JSON source, or a = collection of three separate values retrieved from the JSON source? Michael Kay Saxonica --Apple-Mail=_4E6AD8FD-081F-4A02-856A-285ABC025480 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii

In the heavily JSONPath-dependent app I most = recently worked on, when applying a JSONPath returned multiple values, = we exposed that as a JSON array.  Not religious about this issue, = but the return-an-array seemed to surprise nobody and make people = happy.


How does the receiving application determine = whether a result of [1,2,3] represents a single value retrieved from the = JSON source, or a collection of three separate values retrieved from the = JSON source?

Michael = Kay
Saxonica

= --Apple-Mail=_4E6AD8FD-081F-4A02-856A-285ABC025480-- From nobody Thu Nov 5 15:37:19 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7C7B3A0799 for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 15:37:17 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.898 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MW9eBisPYBDV for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 15:37:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E587B3A0779 for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 15:37:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.217.118] (p548dcc60.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.141.204.96]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4CS0L22XW6zyQp; Fri, 6 Nov 2020 00:37:14 +0100 (CET) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\)) From: Carsten Bormann In-Reply-To: <7EE36A14-0372-4C78-87E4-E79E240F3B09@saxonica.com> Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 00:37:14 +0100 Cc: Tim Bray , jsonpath@ietf.org, Daniel P X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 626312233.931565-7d9a1c86d0de574a511b9395303f303a Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <73967E2D-745C-4638-94C5-D0F5FC5E7B86@tzi.org> References: <7EE36A14-0372-4C78-87E4-E79E240F3B09@saxonica.com> To: Michael Kay X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] Returning multiple values: (was Controversial issues) X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2020 23:37:18 -0000 > How does the receiving application determine whether a result of = [1,2,3] represents a single value retrieved from the JSON source, or a = collection of three separate values retrieved from the JSON source? You always get an array, so if the single value is [1, 2, 3], you get = [[1, 2, 3]]. Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten From nobody Thu Nov 5 15:41:15 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14FE33A07C4 for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 15:41:14 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.895 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.895 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id upCn5t_tzoY3 for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 15:41:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from mailex.mailcore.me (mailex.mailcore.me [94.136.40.144]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 98F763A084D for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 15:40:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from cpc160115-rdng30-2-0-cust150.15-3.cable.virginm.net ([86.19.35.151] helo=[192.168.0.27]) by smtp04.mailcore.me with esmtpa (Exim 4.92.3) (envelope-from ) id 1kaorz-00062W-6P; Thu, 05 Nov 2020 23:40:43 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.7\)) From: Michael Kay In-Reply-To: <73967E2D-745C-4638-94C5-D0F5FC5E7B86@tzi.org> Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 23:40:40 +0000 Cc: Tim Bray , jsonpath@ietf.org, Daniel P Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <1A05239B-92B7-4FB8-87AB-79347D84BF0B@saxonica.com> References: <7EE36A14-0372-4C78-87E4-E79E240F3B09@saxonica.com> <73967E2D-745C-4638-94C5-D0F5FC5E7B86@tzi.org> To: Carsten Bormann X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.7) X-Mailcore-Auth: 439400257 X-Mailcore-Domain: 1881035 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] Returning multiple values: (was Controversial issues) X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2020 23:41:14 -0000 That makes sense. I read Tim's "when [returning] multiple values" as = "when and only when". Michael Kay Saxonica > On 5 Nov 2020, at 23:37, Carsten Bormann wrote: >=20 >> How does the receiving application determine whether a result of = [1,2,3] represents a single value retrieved from the JSON source, or a = collection of three separate values retrieved from the JSON source? >=20 > You always get an array, so if the single value is [1, 2, 3], you get = [[1, 2, 3]]. >=20 > Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten >=20 >=20 From nobody Thu Nov 5 15:46:21 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 839C83A07F9 for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 15:46:20 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vrIanbdviXjJ for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 15:46:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wm1-x332.google.com (mail-wm1-x332.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::332]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 163623A07F5 for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 15:46:19 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wm1-x332.google.com with SMTP id h22so3236440wmb.0 for ; Thu, 05 Nov 2020 15:46:19 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=U8beDadE7vtiZ2LKDESF2CDa6+QtoKQHe2GLpSf9wr4=; b=Vm8xdeYjYQ2bbhptG10bkX2kI51Pt00c+TkQZ4QKPgvx9S+7b73Ayp//X3V6MHZh/+ PoAzts5d332YiGV4veYJ/4GwTnU0yjoVLuCqWu7JhpYQ2SsBrlkhx8ETVJddp2V2RnlF SZxuXwgB9AlX4r8Y++o4Jb/ZW6wKjdscDIDphcIYqGUKVcFA1OBnL1p9hqDhNdy0SD3F 0MZ8ERFOsPr5c7euBIDA2hUdfd8O1O3OEe59z0vRV8G3dB/0qzfy1BQ5nh3e50QNTQLr qfvbQZ/xqB1pug5fkqkD2DV/yKjyR7tXBlG0V0nD1Ou4UPIsoVHsLpnhT44OcDysNx5R /C4g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=U8beDadE7vtiZ2LKDESF2CDa6+QtoKQHe2GLpSf9wr4=; b=Y1oM82i8TIj8+q3bBtfEfq2sqjHdBksJzC1MShZUJVEyHBjiQfRnbqYtTgyRD9iR0t 3KFYjPAUOe7vSpB2n+LvG2vtwqoufx1xRgf8qhpdS7TV1PpFDJl6Cg6AxgvLXaiuHBQn yD79mSs+NSG8EPKBigrs4c9/Vy/BddQeZBj0PeBTSFr2DK6lcdANmnd87lPYHytdqEh2 i5X7MGPGlOmA16zG3wDYFVB3lXTxjIjtZ0RXM0hAsZ+kv618ceV7KCHtQHD2jHZqiW+2 cXEdtxQR/q5Apm11fE7DIO7IOWiiKssP4qOS8hYJ0xomRIdjrG7ybXTjEULspnWAf0T6 B3qA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM53012G7ccir4bbPX8Wac3sWY7MWw0FBfEL+CLaVLA1kQScfyV0Lr ZjRO/x+cUyUYs9ow6X1dfku5K+NvD5jPlBMz5vrKAsSDVUA= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJy11fxWgoRVxGV3a+ttl4so/OAPdA8inxTRFewGqxJggRjAts00tYLHlOq08hNI2h4QHB3WxaLfzCz6rWQ/PLk= X-Received: by 2002:a1c:67d5:: with SMTP id b204mr5323956wmc.92.1604619976986; Thu, 05 Nov 2020 15:46:16 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Daniel P Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 18:46:05 -0500 Message-ID: To: jsonpath@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Archived-At: Subject: [Jsonpath] Fwd: Returning multiple values: (was Controversial issues) X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2020 23:46:20 -0000 Yes, that's certainly the intention expressed by Stefan Goessner in https://goessner.net/articles/JsonPath/: "Please note that the return value of jsonPath is an array, which is also a valid JSON structure. So you might want to apply jsonPath to the resulting structure again or use one of your favorite array methods as sort with it." Daniel On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 6:19 PM Tim Bray wrote: > > In the heavily JSONPath-dependent app I most recently worked on, when applying a JSONPath returned multiple values, we exposed that as a JSON array. Not religious about this issue, but the return-an-array seemed to surprise nobody and make people happy. > > On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 3:10 PM Daniel P wrote: >> >> On 5 Nov 2020, at 11:14, Carsten Bormann wrote: >> >> > The underlying problem here is that of a missing model. >> > XPath has nodesets, and we probably need something like that. >> >> Unlike XPath, where an expression can return items that are >> not XML documents, a JSONPath expression can only return >> JSON values, and a collection of JSON values can be >> returned in a JSON array value. Consequently, introducing >> the idea of node-sets into JSONPath would seem to >> serve no purpose. >> >> Daniel >> >> -- >> Jsonpath mailing list >> Jsonpath@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonpath From nobody Thu Nov 5 16:01:51 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE6543A08C0 for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 16:01:48 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.899 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EOXneC6TvJwk for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 16:01:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from mailex.mailcore.me (mailex.mailcore.me [94.136.40.141]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 20CD23A08B8 for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 16:01:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from cpc160115-rdng30-2-0-cust150.15-3.cable.virginm.net ([86.19.35.151] helo=[192.168.0.27]) by smtp04.mailcore.me with esmtpa (Exim 4.92.3) (envelope-from ) id 1kapCK-0004uc-Mf for jsonpath@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Nov 2020 00:01:44 +0000 From: Michael Kay Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.7\)) Message-Id: <5EFACE94-C326-4C74-A1EC-9F1DD02B5B22@saxonica.com> Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 00:01:43 +0000 To: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.7) X-Mailcore-Auth: 439400257 X-Mailcore-Domain: 1881035 Archived-At: Subject: [Jsonpath] References to XPath X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 06 Nov 2020 00:01:49 -0000 Could the document title=20 JSONPath -- XPath for JSON be changed please? This language is vaguely XPath-like but it is not = XPath; and XPath 3.1 provides a quite different syntax for access to = JSON documents. Someone on StackOverflow today asked a question about JSONPath; they = called it (and tagged it) XPath, we really don't want that kind of = confusion. In addition, the reference to the XPath specification in 6.2 is out of = date, and the comparison with XPath in Table 2 is very approximate and = the terminology inaccurate: for example there is a mention of "node = sets", which exist in XPath 1.0 but not in XPath 2.0, yet the citation = is to XPath 2.0. For someone who knows the semantics of XPath the = comparison raises all sorts of questions about sorting of results into = document order, elimination of duplicates etc, which are complications = this spec can well do without. (Though some answers are needed, for = example if ..store..price matches the same price in more than one way, = do you get more than one result? And if not, what does "the same price" = actually mean?) I think this "explanation by analogy" might have some value in a brief = tutorial, but in a normative specification it can only create confusion. Michael Kay Saxonica= From nobody Thu Nov 5 16:07:47 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 340573A08E7 for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 16:07:45 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zGH3eQRJb2_u for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 16:07:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wr1-x42b.google.com (mail-wr1-x42b.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::42b]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4C3F13A08C5 for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 16:07:39 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wr1-x42b.google.com with SMTP id w1so3735770wrm.4 for ; Thu, 05 Nov 2020 16:07:39 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=iLLVs4qFazLmYJSoJI3bN3e3ijddupdJb8G/XNydENw=; b=tBgZf4uLc4bSiN46wsrgQk6v3zlOSxUiba/Cjl12IdK/wX41lh56Uzec0Fd1QNgi9m Thjyh0FFmVQtMaPPzQyvwhg3p64DcuVSjdCf9QWiamvB8gE7fVFUh3K8x4mRWauDF9IJ 8dxIgCkYbZSOZQ4PqRU1hznowEMBg5jGOYL2umoQ1oZ13oOiryWtg4AGV1+HzHod6vbr ayYz9fByIs46Cg4nKs3xOrvGlZB1TU46iT7jMA8l7SOk1dOEXk+EmWVE//mazb4/Sdjd 05pw9WAlB3D2C6MTh0hR+aAhKp6vqSq4tiL5IAVbqpWmgKwCoUKulCSOcq1u2NLGzzzv zEGg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=iLLVs4qFazLmYJSoJI3bN3e3ijddupdJb8G/XNydENw=; b=ZLiJf5TlIoQg1f3mY2ndm9vaFMdY29ETzMuDo1vlNCIckVnVvmGC+JnD/MdU9KT2bt hPicR7OQ9QBQUrQ+CHnmqwtBJjiFaek9g1GAGjNX3OvoHKuVvOurKgpaLItgjJ/e7h13 0e9DTV1pU9hI/zr1G6x08IfFlrsXIVbtMJsZzLbCF7qK+iz6O0IbTSPKQ8stbiN4DUzl EvYoxBBNLfxqRihUDJCdTSorG41o2GGtYjGt6BlDvTH294jIPkYTwa1mLAhD0V/ZxgBP SpzTVQKNiBC+km7eSBljHU5fR0Wg9vOBnnEXjx/eFUgVl3EsJIOHyJ8ukaDM9DtLBYK1 UX5Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531A7WJTgxySxbVvQJ06ATCk9ebyjzyL6eRBcfRlv2rdMfTZdUoH mcv8rPKxoyhZQJjIgd0bJGHaogNlw0fZCz4/6P5iYGWILEc= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJynIT/elAg9nx7f9tSiJhIy0h17O+C9u09SXoLOebJ9lIvJRM9n9VRZBbWu40czeDmyEVB2WAuSJk2fOuIPFkc= X-Received: by 2002:adf:fd06:: with SMTP id e6mr5757301wrr.206.1604621257247; Thu, 05 Nov 2020 16:07:37 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <906619DA-4C05-4C73-AE27-7AFEB03E8FEA@tzi.org> In-Reply-To: <906619DA-4C05-4C73-AE27-7AFEB03E8FEA@tzi.org> From: Daniel P Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 19:07:25 -0500 Message-ID: To: Jsonpath@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] Controversial issues X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 06 Nov 2020 00:07:45 -0000 On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 6:20 PM Carsten Bormann wrote: > > On 2020-11-06, at 00:10, Daniel P wrote: > > > > On 5 Nov 2020, at 11:14, Carsten Bormann wrote: > > > >> The underlying problem here is that of a missing model. > >> XPath has nodesets, and we probably need something like that. > > > > Unlike XPath, where an expression can return items that are > > not XML documents, a JSONPath expression can only return > > JSON values, > > That may be trivially true, but these values can be values from the input tree, or they can be positions in the tree. A query can return either JSON values or normalized JSON paths (strings), but not both. I don't believe there are any existing JSONPath implementations that support examining the paths while retrieving values. Consequently the JSON data model can support both. In implementations that support paths (the majority don't), the query function takes a parameter that indicates values or paths. In both cases the query returns a JSON array of JSON values, in the latter case, a JSON array of normalized paths. > A set of positions is very much like a node set. In existing implementations, it is a JSON array of JSON string values. > I was less interested in the output formats than in the information that is kept as part of the processing model, and that might indeed also include sets of positions. > Daniel From nobody Thu Nov 5 16:19:31 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1292B3A0965 for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 16:19:30 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.898 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=textuality-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0R0ti39EkcoJ for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 16:19:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-lf1-x12e.google.com (mail-lf1-x12e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::12e]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 87E603A0AA6 for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 16:19:14 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-lf1-x12e.google.com with SMTP id h6so4925247lfj.3 for ; Thu, 05 Nov 2020 16:19:14 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=textuality-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=F2HIu906suMg37Q2Z+veCLW2iOKK1zjpoWEEZ14KNp4=; b=mDdYpx2GzTYK8cy4bthY54nm3WiZu0heBgf0K9OH2x0QHkGbWUeANeSb2HQJu6c82r OTprUTc4p0YlI65W5Dpdaf57XDof1fBX5bdNYyU31WDwgBAlrk3YOdqOnzsV3MG6T0d2 OBlzckUM+1QkjYy0h9hnqjQwHm1JZ10AWHuYdodlJESUaQB/ANw4VM0hBXt4URaVPOhr N1U5qE6sNMDMR7c9bDP5Sh+hByeIUkfUGj8bEhDDv9/WECuCmq4xmutTww4KSNemgmT2 W3nZAJb73KAfySmSjuDdYYSeiJQUomOC3nbSOCiZ8gNBSIPBH44p7u/n8AcoW9aFR3Gt K1Lg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=F2HIu906suMg37Q2Z+veCLW2iOKK1zjpoWEEZ14KNp4=; b=Fln3deVYeNaF1r5XMkDHl9EAh1hJHErLyqcDmIJRfg7N2eYwbZhS6XTDSN/D01nB/D KNEe+nwEzBnGTFa/owqSOY3Dpc4QzV6H4WyKofRsNZb/eD18NRoLX95C+RcCx28O3x2A wmPKXj0be2DcAHCCRPcHwAN2ZCMHpoZAPb1MuHXrFROAYAOhgNWCIk+2ae9OiLfYjf+n /jHhtxeSxQjlQBPgucY45ZPzVHJGG6LdiTmw85ILrI2wN9toAvUnOAf9sQcblavPW1tF 98oT/3kt+ZRUSV7OInOQVtDtAGos0rXk+EuD6Tcy10dOzzbN44wiXYgzTY+nAdLnvIQ+ woVg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531UKwBBGT6bGPtUO6m6YndNvurkClL+m+UtWt4jUfNFTSd9IwpO 6ZAflssxCFygHo4Zl2vxa/c5D1waWiDT7re2qHKg4Q== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyIDmL4g3LfPSELTU2XeyYF/mi+m6wyZgLDpEO31XmNLjHH+PqOFPS7HaZYDD1KK6EiUvKE7t2ml/JjZ+S8pFc= X-Received: by 2002:ac2:46c3:: with SMTP id p3mr1885646lfo.565.1604621952600; Thu, 05 Nov 2020 16:19:12 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <5EFACE94-C326-4C74-A1EC-9F1DD02B5B22@saxonica.com> In-Reply-To: <5EFACE94-C326-4C74-A1EC-9F1DD02B5B22@saxonica.com> From: Tim Bray Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 16:19:01 -0800 Message-ID: To: Michael Kay Cc: jsonpath@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000007be1d205b3652969" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] References to XPath X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 06 Nov 2020 00:19:30 -0000 --0000000000007be1d205b3652969 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" +1 On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 4:01 PM Michael Kay wrote: > Could the document title > > JSONPath -- XPath for JSON > > be changed please? This language is vaguely XPath-like but it is not > XPath; and XPath 3.1 provides a quite different syntax for access to JSON > documents. > > Someone on StackOverflow today asked a question about JSONPath; they > called it (and tagged it) XPath, we really don't want that kind of > confusion. > > In addition, the reference to the XPath specification in 6.2 is out of > date, and the comparison with XPath in Table 2 is very approximate and the > terminology inaccurate: for example there is a mention of "node sets", > which exist in XPath 1.0 but not in XPath 2.0, yet the citation is to XPath > 2.0. For someone who knows the semantics of XPath the comparison raises all > sorts of questions about sorting of results into document order, > elimination of duplicates etc, which are complications this spec can well > do without. (Though some answers are needed, for example if ..store..price > matches the same price in more than one way, do you get more than one > result? And if not, what does "the same price" actually mean?) > > I think this "explanation by analogy" might have some value in a brief > tutorial, but in a normative specification it can only create confusion. > > Michael Kay > Saxonica > -- > Jsonpath mailing list > Jsonpath@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonpath > --0000000000007be1d205b3652969 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
+1<= br>

On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 4:01 PM Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com> wrote:
Could the document title

JSONPath -- XPath for JSON

be changed please? This language is vaguely XPath-like but it is not XPath;= and XPath 3.1 provides a quite different syntax for access to JSON documen= ts.

Someone on StackOverflow today asked a question about JSONPath; they called= it (and tagged it) XPath, we really don't want that kind of confusion.=

In addition, the reference to the XPath specification in 6.2 is out of date= , and the comparison with XPath in Table 2 is very approximate and the term= inology inaccurate: for example there is a mention of "node sets"= , which exist in XPath 1.0 but not in XPath 2.0, yet the citation is to XPa= th 2.0. For someone who knows the semantics of XPath the comparison raises = all sorts of questions about sorting of results into document order, elimin= ation of duplicates etc, which are complications this spec can well do with= out. (Though some answers are needed, for example if ..store..price matches= the same price in more than one way, do you get more than one result? And = if not, what does "the same price" actually mean?)

I think this "explanation by analogy" might have some value in a = brief tutorial, but in a normative specification it can only create confusi= on.

Michael Kay
Saxonica
--
Jsonpath mailing list
Jsonpath@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonpath
--0000000000007be1d205b3652969-- From nobody Fri Nov 6 00:15:41 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D3613A0E93 for ; Fri, 6 Nov 2020 00:15:40 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.898 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id d5Bbs8E1gaZx for ; Fri, 6 Nov 2020 00:15:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A1EA73A0E92 for ; Fri, 6 Nov 2020 00:15:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.217.118] (p548dcc60.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.141.204.96]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4CSCr85TFkzyV4; Fri, 6 Nov 2020 09:15:36 +0100 (CET) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\)) From: Carsten Bormann In-Reply-To: <5EFACE94-C326-4C74-A1EC-9F1DD02B5B22@saxonica.com> Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 09:15:36 +0100 Cc: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 626343336.390057-05d522fade9ca3ebfd0aec629bbc7dc2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <5EFACE94-C326-4C74-A1EC-9F1DD02B5B22@saxonica.com> To: Michael Kay X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] References to XPath X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 06 Nov 2020 08:15:40 -0000 Now https://github.com/jsonpath-wg/draft-goessner-jsonpath/issues/1 Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten From nobody Fri Nov 6 00:46:23 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDC143A0EEC for ; Fri, 6 Nov 2020 00:46:21 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.898 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id phjc2dPFpMis for ; Fri, 6 Nov 2020 00:46:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7542E3A0EED for ; Fri, 6 Nov 2020 00:46:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.217.118] (p548dcc60.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.141.204.96]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4CSDWW2W6qzyb8; Fri, 6 Nov 2020 09:46:15 +0100 (CET) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\)) From: Carsten Bormann In-Reply-To: <5EFACE94-C326-4C74-A1EC-9F1DD02B5B22@saxonica.com> Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 09:46:15 +0100 Cc: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 626345174.971224-28a110cfa98529e9aca7410334674549 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <16E24B1B-151E-4AEB-8C68-F748D8D39156@tzi.org> References: <5EFACE94-C326-4C74-A1EC-9F1DD02B5B22@saxonica.com> To: Michael Kay X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] References to XPath X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 06 Nov 2020 08:46:22 -0000 Hi Michael, indeed, the title clearly needs to be updated to what we are actually = doing here. Mentioning that XPath was an inspiration for the original development of = JSONpath was helpful in 2007 and is still helpful. The text should = certainly not give the impression that XPath is a normative reference = (which it isn=E2=80=99t) =E2=80=94 that=E2=80=99s why the title for 1.2 = is =E2=80=9CInspired by XPath=E2=80=9D. We haven=E2=80=99t discussed yet how we will be constructing the WG = draft; I would expect that draft-goessner is a quarry that contributes = introductory material for that. I would expect that we=E2=80=99ll retain some historical background = information in the final spec and that includes pointing to XPath - = probably not the current version, but the version that actually was the = inspiration. Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten From nobody Fri Nov 6 08:32:52 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A37073A0855 for ; Fri, 6 Nov 2020 08:32:50 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.097 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6dKpkqBYMIAd for ; Fri, 6 Nov 2020 08:32:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-lj1-x22c.google.com (mail-lj1-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::22c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0E5AA3A0844 for ; Fri, 6 Nov 2020 08:32:48 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-lj1-x22c.google.com with SMTP id s9so247966ljo.11 for ; Fri, 06 Nov 2020 08:32:48 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=qP/LQtIpAgidLVzScIhXoFk2x3KCk7snVgIk0DvDSog=; b=FqqjXTLvsfhmei08P7AVcL1qWq/3twpaLJsUX73p9JT1fxajW6N0Q91n7SHdAv9TJz KOZbjzbadttBts4aT/lX4J9B70af6qmgeFg+1ezsZ9GAEzoLRpFfUeTGH3L7XhUcG2iK mVJJt1zl9C20snwZ8C6a0XVdGiVy+yff+FSy7ffmziJqOHxZXBkERxx9agJ3liIO0By4 9HNnLtvpLkgp/CMnJAXGtsBZvXE8YIyoQ3RALeBuIaOkHj1BFp52u5nUWkjswPGVG8oz cozEpe+y5B6ZQIAuwfgmy9wQLOfstbxljx5sHkzeamz38UaE0n9XHK1B5oCODD6NR/7W ra6A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=qP/LQtIpAgidLVzScIhXoFk2x3KCk7snVgIk0DvDSog=; b=hUU35o7vdVJLNlj95x7CnvzBWFjjAj6E0Z1lOKQwVGQc6rTJhV2yFGATcvr2pmBzxf /K8RI8TC4P4fstW7B9tQrDjUJ0+jBhGWNiPjUOuVvKjLvwVAnNUPtUDnBtKu893EyB66 KO7Lfhm41O90xe0w+N8eaNUm4Xm3nGHreXqXCeuaeYvCSbhJ4tGiz+VIBTt7iUfLpPs9 xlnpAa34uzNLY4OIu0dt7nN7w3ofBckNeueuLavPNMbOR1kTJN7dRL7nau/ableFbZXc avvnM4Bie8QnLzYam2YQYgLXTeaAg1OHzB6GrX8vTLynodENOXjI/LWjh30fgHYbcCGl b17w== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532hZXx/p6aG8gWciXv+MaSK3xCY7jLZVyT1ebWmdfVqiKK48QlG e08CzlQwnPa9sEOZU3x4RomgQMEQQ0EITb4jOEpKPSx5l2nbkQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyccgFvhyJCeLABaSo2l2YSdDQdg3+igb1Mud1I0BSf48nnNEngLd5FZZTASNQoiMIG7tDLkyZUlJJ61fcipYE= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:98c5:: with SMTP id s5mr1074725ljj.268.1604680367059; Fri, 06 Nov 2020 08:32:47 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <5EFACE94-C326-4C74-A1EC-9F1DD02B5B22@saxonica.com> <16E24B1B-151E-4AEB-8C68-F748D8D39156@tzi.org> In-Reply-To: <16E24B1B-151E-4AEB-8C68-F748D8D39156@tzi.org> From: Glyn Normington Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 16:32:36 +0000 Message-ID: To: Carsten Bormann Cc: Michael Kay , jsonpath@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000041b90005b372c3af" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] References to XPath X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 06 Nov 2020 16:32:51 -0000 --00000000000041b90005b372c3af Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Perhaps we could avoid mentioning XPath in the title and leave that for the introduction? The other draft has the title "JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Path", for example. On Fri, 6 Nov 2020, 08:46 Carsten Bormann, wrote: > Hi Michael, > > indeed, the title clearly needs to be updated to what we are actually > doing here. > > Mentioning that XPath was an inspiration for the original development of > JSONpath was helpful in 2007 and is still helpful. The text should > certainly not give the impression that XPath is a normative reference > (which it isn=E2=80=99t) =E2=80=94 that=E2=80=99s why the title for 1.2 i= s =E2=80=9CInspired by XPath=E2=80=9D. > > We haven=E2=80=99t discussed yet how we will be constructing the WG draft= ; I would > expect that draft-goessner is a quarry that contributes introductory > material for that. > I would expect that we=E2=80=99ll retain some historical background infor= mation in > the final spec and that includes pointing to XPath - probably not the > current version, but the version that actually was the inspiration. > > Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten > > -- > Jsonpath mailing list > Jsonpath@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonpath > --00000000000041b90005b372c3af Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Perhaps we could avoid mentioning XPath in the title and = leave that for the introduction? The other draft has the title "JavaSc= ript Object Notation (JSON) Path", for example.

On Fri, 6 Nov 2020, 08:= 46 Carsten Bormann, <cabo@tzi.org>= ; wrote:
Hi Michael,

indeed, the title clearly needs to be updated to what we are actually doing= here.

Mentioning that XPath was an inspiration for the original development of JS= ONpath was helpful in 2007 and is still helpful.=C2=A0 The text should cert= ainly not give the impression that XPath is a normative reference (which it= isn=E2=80=99t) =E2=80=94 that=E2=80=99s why the title for 1.2 is =E2=80=9C= Inspired by XPath=E2=80=9D.

We haven=E2=80=99t discussed yet how we will be constructing the WG draft; = I would expect that draft-goessner is a quarry that contributes introductor= y material for that.
I would expect that we=E2=80=99ll retain some historical background informa= tion in the final spec and that includes pointing to XPath - probably not t= he current version, but the version that actually was the inspiration.

Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten

--
Jsonpath mailing list
J= sonpath@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonp= ath
--00000000000041b90005b372c3af-- From nobody Mon Nov 9 03:08:12 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA5203A0EA7 for ; Mon, 9 Nov 2020 03:08:10 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.097 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id G2dKiuLjyt20 for ; Mon, 9 Nov 2020 03:08:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wr1-x432.google.com (mail-wr1-x432.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::432]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CF07D3A0EA9 for ; Mon, 9 Nov 2020 03:08:08 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wr1-x432.google.com with SMTP id p1so8200907wrf.12 for ; Mon, 09 Nov 2020 03:08:08 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=30kCCJOhd6I0ll0EFl0KSW+eUMg9IVpzJPeQQr8sJ68=; b=tpWYeHcZYcyWmFvqoeCIFBGmLm+x1GKBsSLPiWXaVHLopwfjuPNAMa4DNZWns5OWNO /NCnHe2Gg9DR38PfE9quTfin7sBM296aFjGEXJk3oDhdQ/J8xREgoFtLujhe5CLnM/ZL Oxvcm6SBc6VnaRIFC0my9hMgyWpFNIZew14nipKK2b00Z1/O6EnUbWFqVYmFZEOrOBTX KXeiufRbcP/IuXxxj473Dtwnu4EIdIsk+UU/RV4cct3lWf+IPoNgWhXXwM6Deyc7mN7y TPdrJiLhedLuE8biMX3umyMuMLbTnhemCH3CYOD8V9dE7arz4DZfx1t14UhDFd73hr4V zI9Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=30kCCJOhd6I0ll0EFl0KSW+eUMg9IVpzJPeQQr8sJ68=; b=NNmQsDspiWJEBJOy7HEO/0Y/+hFIs0qP3jrNZMe6XVCArmrYaYIy0F8t2UiuBZV+TX OUXHfFXn89U17iShjGPW0OcQ8Q7LAA3OwfqxACPo6BC2fkTIPV0ibM29oYOA60ZC8wFT woWtFPVho3LxM3JzDpmtPyP1d7OrkGSzabf9uIZVvJfNZF/Cru64m0WF4To4fUq1L1jp iucjrQ7jo95HCsmS2myQSnEs3nRkcCBRqgTbfFe4IBgqHYMgouo+PQ2HQGHmOU8QPnjc Mq0UEpJmhjcWoGCp9Zc92oocY5WNoeqkinOBVKW7scJgIFSM1+v6gefKnLlpLQTwCFSW hDDA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533X6/Iq6iBVCUr16WSmbMrghnIdvxlJFIYIZu6zR9ddROc4HzE5 OuE3HCNNNfLCsdR9JJ2YUew= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwdLx/sc3oGYcEMtuO/fKKDYDtwzJ8eFSota/LxHbMxAaLDPs+XG2YsqN2htKSfD743rwYTNA== X-Received: by 2002:adf:b109:: with SMTP id l9mr16827750wra.279.1604920087068; Mon, 09 Nov 2020 03:08:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from normingtong-a01.lan (8.144.199.146.dyn.plus.net. [146.199.144.8]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id n11sm5628573wru.38.2020.11.09.03.08.06 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 09 Nov 2020 03:08:06 -0800 (PST) From: Glyn Normington Message-Id: <81BBEEE9-786A-4BB5-AED1-C36D293B06CC@gmail.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_6AA69F35-3FB6-41A5-BB15-A023EBE229CA" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\)) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 11:08:05 +0000 In-Reply-To: Cc: jsonpath@ietf.org, Carsten Bormann To: Tim Bray References: <1a44354640dbad89b97e0fe46e8ac57dc2e94152.camel@gmail.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] git(hub) usage X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 Nov 2020 11:08:11 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_6AA69F35-3FB6-41A5-BB15-A023EBE229CA Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 On 26 Oct 2020, at 16:13, Tim Bray wrote: >=20 > Per 8875, I've asked Murray to create a GitHub organization and update = the DataTracker, then I'll fill in the basics and we can move forward. Will the GitHub org be created before the inaugural WG meeting? If not, = should we add an agenda item to discuss repurposing jsonpath-standard or = jsonpath-wg instead? >=20 > On Mon, Oct 26, 2020 at 7:51 AM > wrote: > On Mon, 2020-10-26 at 07:42 -0700, Tim Bray wrote: > > Yes please. I'll go ahead and set that up unless one of you wants = to? >=20 > Go for it, thanks. Then you as the Chair will have the necessary admin > priveleges. >=20 > >=20 > > On Mon, Oct 26, 2020 at 6:03 AM Carsten Bormann > wrote: > > >=20 > > > > On 2020-10-26, at 11:50, glyn.normington@gmail.com = wrote: > > > >=20 > > > > On Sun, 2020-10-25 at 00:24 +0200, Carsten Bormann wrote: > > > >> I think by the time of the meeting we should have proposals > > > ready to > > > >> discuss: > > > >> ... > > > >>=20 > > > >> * (if we find a lot of time:) git(hub) operations procedures, > > > e.g., > > > >> how do we make use of issues and pull requests, what is the = role > > > of > > > >> the mailing list, ... > > > >=20 > > > > In terms of git(hub) usage, I'd be happy for the WG to take over > > > > ownership of the jsonpath-standard github organisation, which I > > > > currently own, and (if necessary) to repurpose the contents. > > >=20 > > > RFC 8875 suggests the organization name ietf-wg-jsonpath > > > I=E2=80=99m not a fan of this choice, but it=E2=80=99s the current = guideline. > > >=20 > > > Of course, existing organizations (jsonpath-standard, jsonpath-wg) > > > can be converted to that name. We just should follow RFC 8874/5 > > > (unless there is a good reason not to follow them). > > >=20 > > > Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten > > >=20 >=20 > --=20 > Jsonpath mailing list > Jsonpath@ietf.org > = https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=3Dhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.ie= tf.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fjsonpath&data=3D04%7C01%7Cnormingtong%40= vmware.com%7C75545e80872e447fcc0708d879ca1dd4%7Cb39138ca3cee4b4aa4d6cd83d9= dd62f0%7C0%7C0%7C637393256321527260%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLj= AwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=3DSB= 54LdG%2FDt4vGI%2F5B5sKEzCM7HmSWmg7LpEXgipANSs%3D&reserved=3D0 = --Apple-Mail=_6AA69F35-3FB6-41A5-BB15-A023EBE229CA Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 On = 26 Oct 2020, at 16:13, Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com> wrote:

Per 8875, I've asked = Murray to create a GitHub organization and update the DataTracker, = then I'll fill in the basics and we can move = forward.

Will= the GitHub org be created before the inaugural WG meeting? If not, = should we add an agenda item to discuss repurposing jsonpath-standard or = jsonpath-wg instead?


On Mon, Oct 26, 2020 at 7:51 AM <glyn.normington@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, = 2020-10-26 at 07:42 -0700, Tim Bray wrote:
> Yes = please. I'll go ahead and set that up unless one of you wants to?

Go for it, thanks. Then you as the Chair will = have the necessary admin
priveleges.

> 
> On Mon, Oct 26, 2020 at 6:03 AM Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> wrote:
> > 
> > = > On 2020-10-26, at 11:50, glyn.normington@gmail.com wrote:
> = > > 
> > > On Sun, 2020-10-25 at 00:24 +0200, Carsten = Bormann wrote:
> > >> I think by the time of = the meeting we should have proposals
> > ready to
> > >> discuss:
> > >> = ...
> > >> 
> > = >> * (if we find a lot of time:) git(hub) operations = procedures,
> > e.g.,
> > = >> how do we make use of issues and pull requests, what is the = role
> > of
> > >> the = mailing list, ...
> > > 
> > = > In terms of git(hub) usage, I'd be happy for the WG to take over
> > > ownership of the jsonpath-standard github = organisation, which I
> > > currently own, and = (if necessary) to repurpose the contents.
> > 
> > = RFC 8875 suggests the organization name ietf-wg-jsonpath
> > I=E2=80=99m not a fan of this choice, but it=E2=80=99= s the current guideline.
> > 
> > Of = course, existing organizations (jsonpath-standard, jsonpath-wg)
> > can be converted to that name.  We just should = follow RFC 8874/5
> > (unless there is a good reason = not to follow them).
> > 
> > = Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten
> > 

-- Jsonpath mailing list
Jsonpath@ietf.org
https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=3Dhttps%3A%= 2F%2Fwww.ietf.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fjsonpath&amp;data=3D04%7C01%7= Cnormingtong%40vmware.com%7C75545e80872e447fcc0708d879ca1dd4%7Cb39138ca3ce= e4b4aa4d6cd83d9dd62f0%7C0%7C0%7C637393256321527260%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d= 8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000= &amp;sdata=3DSB54LdG%2FDt4vGI%2F5B5sKEzCM7HmSWmg7LpEXgipANSs%3D&am= p;reserved=3D0

= --Apple-Mail=_6AA69F35-3FB6-41A5-BB15-A023EBE229CA-- From nobody Mon Nov 9 05:20:04 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 80BD73A0F00 for ; Mon, 9 Nov 2020 05:20:03 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.898 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SQYhdOqc7AVF for ; Mon, 9 Nov 2020 05:20:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DFA423A1096 for ; Mon, 9 Nov 2020 05:19:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from client-pool2-341.vpn.uni-bremen.de (client-pool2-341.vpn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.49.85]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4CVBRx4mhRzyXv; Mon, 9 Nov 2020 14:19:57 +0100 (CET) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\)) From: Carsten Bormann In-Reply-To: <81BBEEE9-786A-4BB5-AED1-C36D293B06CC@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 14:19:57 +0100 Cc: Tim Bray , jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 626620797.085611-a053606cc31d1f479460da2f55dfc4ba Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <1a44354640dbad89b97e0fe46e8ac57dc2e94152.camel@gmail.com> <81BBEEE9-786A-4BB5-AED1-C36D293B06CC@gmail.com> To: Glyn Normington X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] git(hub) usage X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 Nov 2020 13:20:04 -0000 On 2020-11-09, at 12:08, Glyn Normington = wrote: >=20 > Will the GitHub org be created before the inaugural WG meeting? If = not, should we add an agenda item to discuss repurposing = jsonpath-standard or jsonpath-wg instead? I=E2=80=99d make a new organization and push over repos from the other = two organizations as we decide. Actually, I just did that because it is too easy. (Not sure I invited the right Murray S. Kucherawy.) Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten From nobody Mon Nov 9 06:04:43 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A8423A0C73 for ; Mon, 9 Nov 2020 06:04:41 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.097 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id l94vCC2Y4MrQ for ; Mon, 9 Nov 2020 06:04:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wr1-x42f.google.com (mail-wr1-x42f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::42f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F40A23A0C1F for ; Mon, 9 Nov 2020 06:04:39 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wr1-x42f.google.com with SMTP id j7so1556532wrp.3 for ; Mon, 09 Nov 2020 06:04:39 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=Fr38RQXeJ8Whnu8/PVzJkPcNaiX5syeEIA7Tw7G3NuU=; b=a7FDaKsU44bojfq99oBu7wXUKdQTSo9FkPkmYZIW4eyHfa+n4ZWbiqKrCOGQUfwZo+ oPRtGr2+2P51po20EMb2gQjcXHtpTy0pqMyVsSjxbNBNOKFaQIyvUXhHKTnUQh1yTQPc Hp6c4bCwOcnGvcm8MKvVumiuHh0MYcp/qGPtU9hYoOdDYNofsQ/m+ZVmFE25lfhnnfdn tXzLQqD5vvr/9aD5xL9boalVgskp9++7R1hpHUMeEM+LNvJpbusKFpafDVlyebCrqPUQ RsgjZF01ffrTERYv6q1Im0nx1815gof6EvlBNEPk654IQFx9A9/BWz5ESruIuAuP7pmW ni2A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=Fr38RQXeJ8Whnu8/PVzJkPcNaiX5syeEIA7Tw7G3NuU=; b=PowdRhWwKoDjRsWu910zUPZ114hy+IsCdyOo9ek90tM450g0fqkKMMDoPI/CMPPO9v b9J1Y/9ZZys5W3vcug1/gn8Jt3WJn6+zL5/o8l6L2QvCH2O/7DdiAixzNGj2OF9LbkTX sIB5pozCwj9hDZZfT/nRfgyG8/YtKV13eyqTMbL1sgoNL5aqe3BipUA6AISFK3dgQ1yN HCboi+EuYYrtbXZ1KGJHRMPoIYpZaLCZGm1/w/Uj7mq3RfqmGZyeJRp76J3V3mewDYd1 dTc5YGkhDCN0L4Edk0iO8SX5QDMTRjZYSYKP/DpDQPM+kDsH7upMAKbXk8hTMGq/7RfZ pL0Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5328OsXJiZR9VFJqrA7encg7cqK9e4RTBdSd8+Aq9mDTZDSzANyy b8czcEEX0RZNPsTZctCF7vo= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJy1DQ8wjotfzlFVQ1uhl3If49gxvTCMYemEBcZNPqmOo4pQHv7G2mQCbneTxdbcfXrzquLLiw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6000:107:: with SMTP id o7mr18003613wrx.354.1604930678099; Mon, 09 Nov 2020 06:04:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from normingtong-a01.lan (8.144.199.146.dyn.plus.net. [146.199.144.8]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id g11sm4613254wrq.7.2020.11.09.06.04.36 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 09 Nov 2020 06:04:36 -0800 (PST) From: Glyn Normington Message-Id: <8030632C-DF12-4A5F-B181-76A840BA2649@gmail.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_AA0A2E69-6F7E-4056-8121-43FA4D27CC4A" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\)) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 14:04:36 +0000 In-Reply-To: Cc: Tim Bray , jsonpath@ietf.org To: Carsten Bormann References: <1a44354640dbad89b97e0fe46e8ac57dc2e94152.camel@gmail.com> <81BBEEE9-786A-4BB5-AED1-C36D293B06CC@gmail.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] git(hub) usage X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 Nov 2020 14:04:42 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_AA0A2E69-6F7E-4056-8121-43FA4D27CC4A Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Thanks for creating https://github.com/ietf-wg-jsonpath = . Does this need to be added to = datatracker? > On 9 Nov 2020, at 13:19, Carsten Bormann wrote: >=20 > On 2020-11-09, at 12:08, Glyn Normington = wrote: >>=20 >> Will the GitHub org be created before the inaugural WG meeting? If = not, should we add an agenda item to discuss repurposing = jsonpath-standard or jsonpath-wg instead? >=20 > I=E2=80=99d make a new organization and push over repos from the other = two organizations as we decide. >=20 > Actually, I just did that because it is too easy. > (Not sure I invited the right Murray S. Kucherawy.) >=20 > Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten >=20 --Apple-Mail=_AA0A2E69-6F7E-4056-8121-43FA4D27CC4A Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Thanks for creating https://github.com/ietf-wg-jsonpath. Does this need to be = added to datatracker?

On 9 Nov 2020, at 13:19, = Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> wrote:

On = 2020-11-09, at 12:08, Glyn Normington <glyn.normington@gmail.com> wrote:

Will the = GitHub org be created before the inaugural WG meeting? If not, should we = add an agenda item to discuss repurposing jsonpath-standard or = jsonpath-wg instead?

I=E2=80=99d= make a new organization and push over repos from the other two = organizations as we decide.

Actually, I = just did that because it is too easy.
(Not sure I invited = the right Murray S. Kucherawy.)

Gr=C3=BC=C3=9F= e, Carsten

= --Apple-Mail=_AA0A2E69-6F7E-4056-8121-43FA4D27CC4A-- From nobody Mon Nov 9 06:38:15 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40F483A0DDF for ; Mon, 9 Nov 2020 06:38:14 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, FREEMAIL_REPLY=1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 78_M64LaBUht for ; Mon, 9 Nov 2020 06:38:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-ej1-x62b.google.com (mail-ej1-x62b.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::62b]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CF22B3A0DA4 for ; Mon, 9 Nov 2020 06:38:12 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ej1-x62b.google.com with SMTP id cw8so12576611ejb.8 for ; Mon, 09 Nov 2020 06:38:12 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language; bh=6kH5poA4GlfkwYBEHSUE5MWSrRfYwKUpTThB4rJMgTI=; b=qVSnPpS30mMXno+AJem6CXS4iVTHShJqJL7BotbQbNAyUdDFR+OyOgPiGsr18S61Ga /Le32E/EX5KIZpB3SMFbKkauapzb+vOq9l4KaTFWlQMQdaFZ2+4h40pinNub9SXxh54u 72puhU9utXn/2e3pRDTdJFNaBSwFNVzO9MgWoy6DUIsyopGXS8ltHxLMjCvQfs0PEQ9Z Wk92QAiSMvscdpXxpTh2+HXAWEUW1ACGNNVWokSCASFb1rAMCLBlFpikJxEWgLd7X7ok UXn25twcSGcC+t90KxFHd0ZZuigSL+rG3rmXw5kONXJvwUGgG3ywo4wfX8uDyFiQYyjr h6KQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language; bh=6kH5poA4GlfkwYBEHSUE5MWSrRfYwKUpTThB4rJMgTI=; b=Rwy+X5+xyxKZL29UbHKNJgEgXybipFU9JqyjKjNj0UBlzTX0T1O5qIZGfBiaQT7nmX 19/24EstQ0Xb+yVAg4nR7fCSNxte+jKPPKZdNE8it8k9r/4qhoqx1u9P08n4c4Skwhxj IFkhLIwLYxneNmSY9rnsF0+RK4UJpFWQeXNANl2lsmsynFdE1PdMWAQM2toOs4IWFAj4 3s5hGQllcw+ca7T64cXh9KgllErumg8W+hNxpjCEx4TmELtxAJ58UNh8mlD+LRvFUSZ+ ukHdxjxdd9kPyvRPZY1U+CEVvfze3e/g/xUrjGRXQNGhdTVJGtyroDpy87y3kne2DZII pTMw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530wZaWmAqpo/Fc0iZCkYY91ryXmETaRTmQBXxqWmCJaGa4RVS91 m2W6NWJ602Bl3Wiz7CAxJYc= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzjUGHTQAMidA5+Oj6m0FYEWQMVg35y4ma9BtS9gpaeo7uihP1G5agC6XOTKhJk2UTQ8a4+cg== X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:e15:: with SMTP id l21mr15907645eji.509.1604932690897; Mon, 09 Nov 2020 06:38:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from TTA4265.fritz.box ([2001:984:65b0:2:201f:9b5a:2722:478e]) by smtp.gmail.com with UTF8SMTPSA id b12sm9043086edn.86.2020.11.09.06.38.10 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 09 Nov 2020 06:38:10 -0800 (PST) To: Glyn Normington , Carsten Bormann Cc: jsonpath@ietf.org, Tim Bray References: <1a44354640dbad89b97e0fe46e8ac57dc2e94152.camel@gmail.com> <81BBEEE9-786A-4BB5-AED1-C36D293B06CC@gmail.com> <8030632C-DF12-4A5F-B181-76A840BA2649@gmail.com> From: James Message-ID: <11dce121-9ec7-6bde-aa02-e3d4edb65f9d@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 15:38:09 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.16; rv:83.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/83.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <8030632C-DF12-4A5F-B181-76A840BA2649@gmail.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------D4D54A838907700E6928A502" Content-Language: en-US Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] git(hub) usage X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 Nov 2020 14:38:14 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------D4D54A838907700E6928A502 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit I've added it to datatracker. - J On 09/11/2020 14:04, Glyn Normington wrote: > Thanks for creating https://github.com/ietf-wg-jsonpath > . Does this need to be added to > datatracker? > >> On 9 Nov 2020, at 13:19, Carsten Bormann > > wrote: >> >> On 2020-11-09, at 12:08, Glyn Normington > > wrote: >>> >>> Will the GitHub org be created before the inaugural WG meeting? If >>> not, should we add an agenda item to discuss repurposing >>> jsonpath-standard or jsonpath-wg instead? >> >> I’d make a new organization and push over repos from the other two >> organizations as we decide. >> >> Actually, I just did that because it is too easy. >> (Not sure I invited the right Murray S. Kucherawy.) >> >> Grüße, Carsten >> > > --------------D4D54A838907700E6928A502 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

I've added it to datatracker.

- J

On 09/11/2020 14:04, Glyn Normington wrote:
Thanks for creating https://github.com/ietf-wg-jsonpath. Does this need to be added to datatracker?

On 9 Nov 2020, at 13:19, Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> wrote:

On 2020-11-09, at 12:08, Glyn Normington <glyn.normington@gmail.com> wrote:

Will the GitHub org be created before the inaugural WG meeting? If not, should we add an agenda item to discuss repurposing jsonpath-standard or jsonpath-wg instead?

I’d make a new organization and push over repos from the other two organizations as we decide.

Actually, I just did that because it is too easy.
(Not sure I invited the right Murray S. Kucherawy.)

Grüße, Carsten



--------------D4D54A838907700E6928A502-- From nobody Mon Nov 9 09:04:10 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB84D3A1149 for ; Mon, 9 Nov 2020 09:04:04 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.097 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4M2izWHnwECF for ; Mon, 9 Nov 2020 09:04:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wr1-x42e.google.com (mail-wr1-x42e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::42e]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 21D943A1235 for ; Mon, 9 Nov 2020 09:04:03 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wr1-x42e.google.com with SMTP id 23so9469196wrc.8 for ; Mon, 09 Nov 2020 09:04:03 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=MtURyUgMuvkN2K5USvapQSBA/q/kVLcABdkbyB91+9E=; b=HtyRTupK20ZECXY9yYybsDsBHmZOF0d9Bt3f4JFtv4mnxw4hG1aL4CBeoKp/ALEZnX 3amc6M5VVI1vUE6J/dT7OJTY+czyieIs7G8LtPzansBV4YbfJE3fPSt2Axtuwbrnfj07 9Hx5v2XrVjodNdWrv78x5Od8o10r0q8l93nQgFunhRLcbJkdhu9YOlczTeEnaysAan1i yHu1YTGjXYmN6B5EdHBtrS2b3ThVDU5IOTtL7UtdzjTgHaIpCD0384LvNtMjbKG/tZZP iaKdGr4PtpV5J10r4lxq7lyWl08c53IZBxDtXBO8kSdqqfRNs75/FWhUbvRPnFtPbNu9 pK9g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=MtURyUgMuvkN2K5USvapQSBA/q/kVLcABdkbyB91+9E=; b=uOD4HnM4rIm1YNIzURXiHNwTLNsYEaLMldiV3XYtqMhZA+Vqxyb82Gx079xHEA5/BJ xvqNuuVf/reJhuFNjyCu2qE9I+SQ9Pe5L1KlinJlZLv0Zg9SZvD4NOk2R8RKG1QgRZU0 zNYwZxcg2FwgFY9xnTU5Y6tKCQZmFxQs2L7H1p9MNIZrPi9vCCCuVBUqgs2+2CV5CfUt wv3/XwuLt+Blp62RlFHnNbg5/dKrFiA/bR/kJFxliMy9agrgZbz3cu+1K08F7y9+ieDQ Agz5QehfnLXBfAdvmSzk71DhLQpTULgHOzYDSkqFWiD8Kr6iufJB57nOPMzZPnMAYnMM jBYQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532MjYN6UIoUYeXu65klhtBsWi6zM756DoAaZrSRoOtEXvJvbZgP 9HRhlOYPczC82mo+/fU2a0o= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyuUUsKJp/gubu49UYB3YY1OcSQg1YbePJTsRim4PvzCGG/76MizQIUIaWGY3At4Xc1unIO/A== X-Received: by 2002:adf:fb0f:: with SMTP id c15mr18249878wrr.86.1604941441515; Mon, 09 Nov 2020 09:04:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from normingtong-a01.lan (8.144.199.146.dyn.plus.net. [146.199.144.8]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id n14sm14211029wrt.8.2020.11.09.09.04.00 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 09 Nov 2020 09:04:00 -0800 (PST) From: Glyn Normington Message-Id: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_99A25FE6-D33F-4943-AF99-D05F6CFC02A5" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\)) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 17:03:59 +0000 In-Reply-To: <11dce121-9ec7-6bde-aa02-e3d4edb65f9d@gmail.com> Cc: Carsten Bormann , jsonpath@ietf.org, Tim Bray To: James References: <1a44354640dbad89b97e0fe46e8ac57dc2e94152.camel@gmail.com> <81BBEEE9-786A-4BB5-AED1-C36D293B06CC@gmail.com> <8030632C-DF12-4A5F-B181-76A840BA2649@gmail.com> <11dce121-9ec7-6bde-aa02-e3d4edb65f9d@gmail.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] git(hub) usage X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 Nov 2020 17:04:05 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_99A25FE6-D33F-4943-AF99-D05F6CFC02A5 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Perfect. > On 9 Nov 2020, at 14:38, James wrote: >=20 > I've added it to datatracker. >=20 > - J >=20 > On 09/11/2020 14:04, Glyn Normington wrote: >> Thanks for creating https://github.com/ietf-wg-jsonpath = . Does this need to be added to = datatracker? >>=20 >>> On 9 Nov 2020, at 13:19, Carsten Bormann > wrote: >>>=20 >>> On 2020-11-09, at 12:08, Glyn Normington > wrote: >>>>=20 >>>> Will the GitHub org be created before the inaugural WG meeting? If = not, should we add an agenda item to discuss repurposing = jsonpath-standard or jsonpath-wg instead? >>>=20 >>> I=E2=80=99d make a new organization and push over repos from the = other two organizations as we decide. >>>=20 >>> Actually, I just did that because it is too easy. >>> (Not sure I invited the right Murray S. Kucherawy.) >>>=20 >>> Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten >>>=20 >>=20 >>=20 --Apple-Mail=_99A25FE6-D33F-4943-AF99-D05F6CFC02A5 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Perfect.

On 9 Nov 2020, at 14:38, James = <james.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:

=20 =20

I've added it to datatracker.

- J

On 09/11/2020 14:04, Glyn Normington wrote:
Thanks for creating https://github.com/ietf-wg-jsonpath. Does this need to be added to datatracker?

On 9 Nov 2020, at 13:19, Carsten Bormann = <cabo@tzi.org> wrote:

On 2020-11-09, at 12:08, Glyn Normington = <glyn.normington@gmail.com> wrote:

Will the GitHub org be created before the inaugural WG meeting? If not, should we add an agenda item to discuss repurposing jsonpath-standard or jsonpath-wg instead?

I=E2=80=99d make a new organization and push over repos = from the other two organizations as we decide.

Actually, I just did that because it is too easy.
(Not sure I invited the right Murray S. Kucherawy.)

Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten




= --Apple-Mail=_99A25FE6-D33F-4943-AF99-D05F6CFC02A5-- From nobody Wed Nov 11 09:23:11 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 260AB3A2CA2 for ; Wed, 11 Nov 2020 09:23:05 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.097 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8fmPdkvCuW_X for ; Wed, 11 Nov 2020 09:23:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-vk1-xa29.google.com (mail-vk1-xa29.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::a29]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 183723A1DF7 for ; Wed, 11 Nov 2020 09:17:11 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-vk1-xa29.google.com with SMTP id q77so658298vkq.1 for ; Wed, 11 Nov 2020 09:17:11 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=zwbHJb6gNy4v/EmW+aJZ1E4On6lcodkkxsobFTL76k8=; b=d/Hzg37Sh4NgtmNIRh8fwvRFZsgfQbLDkLcMRGkyGyEgb9D+HHZox8LfnIe55FvV4J 715fB7GbPFfuIrVFbzWpWOspk3mnQRyhYTb+CP7J2D1MVNongjnkmi8YLO9mg8rCPlk/ khNlkBuB1QzRuHaY61uWmkdnCIHMlViVLWhEVkue+sIZo4oKxh8/GC9IY2lvQPJ5KywL vhSimrYO4x0jz9wg7IJB+rMsL426hsisabcT8yBB4BcUz/8oyzsnyhGeGxN0vn9RWw4q kWeaXPlMak+EpS2JDukrv++gudQkQKJEWq7McLIT0cFsJwfvH0iUGk4xuIhPZevo1o6W vTmg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=zwbHJb6gNy4v/EmW+aJZ1E4On6lcodkkxsobFTL76k8=; b=Qila11Hyar7DM/KnUAvSx5L+nJSd3dktE1hiqF/u4iiuco9+m7Y/Uv6wd08lmgV+M2 oHUitgnmBFsW/3R6JC2UdxC6G7nDaAyBeVAmyzw3bxoj83syLbKO/DTzU/u7LZaVS01s Zw4KMPvQYoyxfQU8XrkKWf7J75SrC+qcogd+6Yj5cFhI1tD8o8m4vn0oz/Rt22DFiipK Rxb09u9L0PMxKYHJ82Y3AUGAE/d6kYWtyo0X4DwovBIPia/2Y7V1q4StH9nFt1y/KqbR WwYdyyuzs+HEcqUqTbNWc2X7oOwZeHdzisTAcbA1h8BjJSeBvabu1iO6k4QYLKl1PoTr XNMw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532lSmjXZZ31gpRJAk8euT77yq19T5eHURGGQQX6yaaeZgtxhhgB GZ6sgL7kj3DTXD+GEWBgDhiAtSt+qnKlQzxh9JY= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJx/z2mM8fmpB8k6YSqwlPIiiDuHBOZIwn8vf3nJsQvaqkmt5BFoE261cTTHkNAwaa30gsWScaJOBSB7//bRqnY= X-Received: by 2002:ac5:c952:: with SMTP id s18mr14107971vkm.5.1605115031004; Wed, 11 Nov 2020 09:17:11 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1a44354640dbad89b97e0fe46e8ac57dc2e94152.camel@gmail.com> <81BBEEE9-786A-4BB5-AED1-C36D293B06CC@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 09:16:58 -0800 Message-ID: To: Carsten Bormann Cc: Glyn Normington , jsonpath@ietf.org, Tim Bray Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000003f294305b3d7f7db" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] git(hub) usage X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 17:23:10 -0000 --0000000000003f294305b3d7f7db Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 5:20 AM Carsten Bormann wrote: > (Not sure I invited the right Murray S. Kucherawy.) > There's more than one?! -MSK --0000000000003f294305b3d7f7db Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 5:20 AM Carsten Bo= rmann <cabo@tzi.org> wrote:
(Not sure I invited the right Murray S. Kucherawy.)
<= div>
There's more than one?!

-MS= K
--0000000000003f294305b3d7f7db-- From nobody Wed Nov 11 12:12:15 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3D753A1034 for ; Wed, 11 Nov 2020 12:12:13 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.897 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id u-nFdot3SJMM for ; Wed, 11 Nov 2020 12:12:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3BB973A1024 for ; Wed, 11 Nov 2020 12:12:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.217.118] (p548dcc60.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.141.204.96]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4CWbVf5RhGzyYN; Wed, 11 Nov 2020 21:12:10 +0100 (CET) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\)) From: Carsten Bormann In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 21:12:10 +0100 Cc: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 626818330.2685-424915ec4bc170e17500957cc64e3534 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <39F50996-B6E2-4AF9-8A27-11C3DBE312BF@tzi.org> References: <1a44354640dbad89b97e0fe46e8ac57dc2e94152.camel@gmail.com> <81BBEEE9-786A-4BB5-AED1-C36D293B06CC@gmail.com> To: "Murray S. Kucherawy" X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] git(hub) usage X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 20:12:14 -0000 On 2020-11-11, at 18:16, Murray S. Kucherawy = wrote: >=20 > On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 5:20 AM Carsten Bormann wrote: > (Not sure I invited the right Murray S. Kucherawy.) >=20 > There's more than one?! I don=E2=80=99t know! Some IETFers make a point of not being findable on github(*). (I mean, there is this guy with the email address =E2=80=9Csuperuser@...=E2= =80=9C, why wouldn=E2=80=99t he do the same on github.) Also, someone evil could create a "Murray S. Kucherawy=E2=80=9D account = on github at any time. These two together make it necessary to ask. (But my sleuthing seems to have worked.) Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten (*) Privacy and all, but generally not a good move for engineers that = try to change the world. From nobody Wed Nov 11 12:31:50 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB4BA3A10BD for ; Wed, 11 Nov 2020 12:31:48 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.097 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id E5AwAfteUkjw for ; Wed, 11 Nov 2020 12:31:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-qv1-xf30.google.com (mail-qv1-xf30.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::f30]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A4BF83A10B7 for ; Wed, 11 Nov 2020 12:31:44 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-qv1-xf30.google.com with SMTP id x13so1595169qvk.8 for ; Wed, 11 Nov 2020 12:31:44 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=UABC+9uegyfEUpnG8oSHDt49Ct9gY4fI9ayAZK0eQv8=; b=UIhorulHl503K3mX/NrWr2TqeKlfNEZiwwpBKr0O4iyKKbAQEznc8Bh1OLNhbtnxrt 5XlLD1KcKS7LhVtgWkqKKE3+snhvaFER2VhM9HEjwneqPB6vgoAQyYuZ9ZmHt/V+ZRXb F1rxfxS0UWCmS0gdCaXeyCeASI0kHzkjIOwsSA9G9ZFgHfWpTSB0t2V6S5+QLQZ4cWL9 BAHQ5FwkKHHoS1Gv36ECZmA7nEaQiyjOS921g2OyC/QzCQwL9SDj25ZkS2KnVIuewQ0t nB1+ZCX4fHUZk+o5b990vZguuMVFn/VX+yFsPR8ZX/gE9Rh4dmgoN+F1gA5mimEmwOql w4QA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=UABC+9uegyfEUpnG8oSHDt49Ct9gY4fI9ayAZK0eQv8=; b=MxwLP+5M95EkfxNUYj+leeL/u7mtdcImEvn0FaqXUABE+L0IpjS4FbB46sKJmo1eon YLhKVhR4/ne6aGHKm3sCgUgElTAdA4U5I4fPSj+4gWcYLTA3uvsGC8IeMjKmZ6/V0XCC hGITEpiK/M14g0Bzl9z1fv6znnMf1+CCG4x6PLacb5F8UBebALQ5kqIF4ODmZgMDhKev 0DAswayvZIv2v80OQHgKXMcTIoss81Tlm8bPB1QepfnOAnGOn6T5bfBAgEjU3cieEstB +0+Q/7w38QzyITDD91LwtJuc+8XbD2Ma6ohdJKb1sQQeFnx3JsrmKw8hPcQp/efpTBeX 02IA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532rZwU0Ym9so+tEP849zpKE3qnqZ5Hc2i7g2KXSzh5HTP56epQL PVJFqZIcwy8lGLhJxdKteiEcGU5rYIe/7Ga0egM= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzx6KyoZ8oEYUXGA3d3H5Rxemf95brOtcNOOdcQVtDYdin1pQtQw6dSsuh974ZB/Qh1RSGCy8ECf7z3uwGxaoY= X-Received: by 2002:a0c:fb06:: with SMTP id c6mr26496457qvp.10.1605126703733; Wed, 11 Nov 2020 12:31:43 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1a44354640dbad89b97e0fe46e8ac57dc2e94152.camel@gmail.com> <81BBEEE9-786A-4BB5-AED1-C36D293B06CC@gmail.com> <39F50996-B6E2-4AF9-8A27-11C3DBE312BF@tzi.org> In-Reply-To: <39F50996-B6E2-4AF9-8A27-11C3DBE312BF@tzi.org> From: Marko Mikulicic Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 21:31:32 +0100 Message-ID: To: Carsten Bormann Cc: "Murray S. Kucherawy" , jsonpath@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000fee5c805b3daae5d" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] git(hub) usage X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 20:31:49 -0000 --000000000000fee5c805b3daae5d Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable FWIW Keybase (https://keybase.io/) is a nice solution to the problem of stitching up an identity based of various unrelated identity providers (and thus unrelated namespaces) On Wed, Nov 11, 2020, 21:12 Carsten Bormann wrote: > On 2020-11-11, at 18:16, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote: > > > > On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 5:20 AM Carsten Bormann wrote: > > (Not sure I invited the right Murray S. Kucherawy.) > > > > There's more than one?! > > I don=E2=80=99t know! > > Some IETFers make a point of not being findable on github(*). > (I mean, there is this guy with the email address =E2=80=9Csuperuser@...= =E2=80=9C, why > wouldn=E2=80=99t he do the same on github.) > Also, someone evil could create a "Murray S. Kucherawy=E2=80=9D account o= n github > at any time. > These two together make it necessary to ask. > > (But my sleuthing seems to have worked.) > > Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten > > (*) Privacy and all, but generally not a good move for engineers that try > to change the world. > > -- > Jsonpath mailing list > Jsonpath@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonpath > --000000000000fee5c805b3daae5d Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
FWIW Keybase (https://key= base.io/) is a nice solution to the problem of stitching up an identity= based of various unrelated identity providers (and thus unrelated namespac= es)

On Wed, Nov 11, 2020, 21:12 Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> wrote:
On 2020-11-11, at 18:16, Murray S. Kucherawy <superuser@gmail.com&= gt; wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 5:20 AM Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> wrot= e:
> (Not sure I invited the right Murray S. Kucherawy.)
>
> There's more than one?!

I don=E2=80=99t know!

Some IETFers make a point of not being findable on github(*).
(I mean, there is this guy with the email address =E2=80=9Csuperuser@...=E2= =80=9C, why wouldn=E2=80=99t he do the same on github.)
Also, someone evil could create a "Murray S. Kucherawy=E2=80=9D accoun= t on github at any time.
These two together make it necessary to ask.

(But my sleuthing seems to have worked.)

Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten

(*) Privacy and all, but generally not a good move for engineers that try t= o change the world.

--
Jsonpath mailing list
J= sonpath@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonp= ath
--000000000000fee5c805b3daae5d-- From nobody Thu Nov 12 09:37:27 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D21E3A144B for ; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 09:37:25 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4ONmEH-xVj-p for ; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 09:37:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wr1-x42d.google.com (mail-wr1-x42d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::42d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 256A33A1448 for ; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 09:37:24 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wr1-x42d.google.com with SMTP id c17so6859429wrc.11 for ; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 09:37:24 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=JFdlKngq5uEjTteFnPYZvB+HUa2TENOq/Exfw948/pk=; b=Gkj95XMM6QvWUS3EZMDmOZb+jpOoVRwRi26nieVd3m9jMNZdg870Wwj4XlaR38nPc1 YleOj9rmFOJ536+e8BxXx8ueUgcGHJ1ShU5keMYVL+/D+xO8HWy+LD338sfIDqGTtpM7 sYzzxlCSjYZqgRmi8S01esYtW54+ggXnGv6qCoWmubhYJkajMKpdnRy4EPgN0Q+qIYZ5 9vI0iOGbZH+w+5Kq2pvK9nl9IoIJ+BPCPlVtkqz2MQuT14/l8Ubz7KTEmccmbqiP0Fhu aLxx8dTq6vfgVv+AJIjfMroH1Uxw/5HtCmOH0dpTBXF3PhumL7Y+gvOiHVVUOHvSCaII mrfw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=JFdlKngq5uEjTteFnPYZvB+HUa2TENOq/Exfw948/pk=; b=Q3yRDCR91RM9gaRJMJ2uFlFSw0fSD4tc9GvFk9wPxP6r9k25X93UBwh78gXcLE5fZx oL9YvfJGR8PZUxVfG0/je/EX6zxkUJviFZKmj1CG439LmFfTkkLib9rJFdxnDRSE1+w8 6w/1bz2Fx1WJ4xNMeEqrMLQQdAxKSkdIHiJC7rudOlffdjbKm4zVRy0yu7p3AM1U95/o TqtDmXtKqUqRCOMBZQhnIeGcv1QZePLSSjOIiIwpwlFiXJEOArWA2Si5Up5+A0aoBP3X w+eDFRMD8lYFmpU2tYfcuBbznru0LhyDNKDDr1FlASUt9lW6bpjzvFEApVunaF3yLU/Y iRbg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530a8viVVneNhyc9IEpzE/UxMha2+8nx3y0N1roSfx/O23hGXjzc K1Gly/WSXCl0O0ZkoyPfchJwpvPhGZuW2dq4HcgczacFxWLTPA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyiB2ToacD6PclO48YATET92XR5yAqPKBu+uVfjqp9715ppeeEG30Rbi3voKZeM9DDX0jfcU/zO56DbMMY5NNg= X-Received: by 2002:adf:fb0f:: with SMTP id c15mr719151wrr.86.1605202642003; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 09:37:22 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Daniel P Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2020 12:37:09 -0500 Message-ID: To: jsonpath@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Archived-At: Subject: [Jsonpath] Remarks on the JSONPath ABNF grammar in draft-goessner-dispatch-jsonpath-00.html X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2020 17:37:26 -0000 In https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-goessner-dispatch-jsonpath-00.html, in Section 3, there is a suggested JSONPath ABNF grammar. (1) A slice expression within square brackets is expressed as value-expression *2(":" value-expression) value-expression = *DIGIT / name / script-expression / filter-expression Note that a slice expression in Goessner is defined with reference to the (long since abandoned) ECMASCRIPT 4. The original link is lost, but there is some discussion here, https://web.archive.org/web/20070125020659/developer.mozilla.org/es4/proposals/slice_syntax.html. I've never seen an attempted formalization of JSONPath (or JMESPath, for that matter) that defines a slice expression allowing general expressions, nor do I think there is any prior experience with that in any existing implementations. Also note that negative numbers are allowed in slice expressions as per ECMASCRIPT 4. The usual definition is slice-expression = [number] ":" [number] [ ":" [number] ] number = ["-"]1*digit (2) In step = ".." name ; nested descendants / "." name ; child (dot notation) name = "'" text "'" / "*" ; wildcard a name is defined as a single quoted string or a wildcard. But note that JSONPath also supports unquoted strings. So perhaps step = ".." name-or-wildcard ; nested descendants / "." name-or-wildcard ; child (dot notation) name-or-wildcard = unquoted-name / single-quoted-name / wildcard single-quoted-name = ; must escape single quotes in character sequence unquoted-name = ; must start with an alphabetic character Also note that a number of implementations (but not Goessner) support double quoted names as an extension. (3) Many JSONPath implementations support functions. For example the popular and influential jayway implementation, https://github.com/json-path/JsonPath, supports a somewhat limited idea of functions that can be invoked at the tail end of a path - min, max, avg, stddev, length, sum. We also see this adopted in Oracle's version of JSONPath, https://docs.oracle.com/cd/E60058_01/PDF/8.0.8.x/8.0.8.0.0/PMF_HTML/JsonPath_Expressions.htm. There are other implementations that take a more general approach to functions, more along the lines of XPath. Is it within the scope of the working group to discuss functions? There are some implications for the grammar. Daniel From nobody Thu Nov 12 23:30:27 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 412703A15F0 for ; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 23:30:26 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.097 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 84l4Q8Kmi4Tv for ; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 23:30:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wm1-x332.google.com (mail-wm1-x332.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::332]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9C8BA3A15EC for ; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 23:30:24 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wm1-x332.google.com with SMTP id c9so7196747wml.5 for ; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 23:30:24 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=VlyvK3YJ5lCLcfTofcayly0N8hgrcNrfQ+Jfq1PlrF8=; b=I2M3Qy7lCv0xIrGsqFuSZiJyiiWcXiBY340GI7Ip5yn4CTrfWeJXV1TXnh67W3ttwR /nRrOdl1Qtaw8t/p3dRulhjzI3k8hQpbFWtgPtVaZSGOALXQYtqUmTAv4wb9slR60GGo VTjBttJ5msmyqa2uBZ8OBjcAx+mOJERIwZpOzuUz2JBsqsKSoSqrGf5Nl8gvPo0oT/H1 Q6h5lANJFEga1Ii3qSD4pJZNDNZKOWoKq0C70/zkAiZOGpgpvwd+Rc23pSHyUsyKiNK+ rQU5LgH+5AekVDY+sV5H+OeSLxgl4k8deMrtz8taZmHjUYoaPgT2RLC7GN0i2Xnt3sxB T5OA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=VlyvK3YJ5lCLcfTofcayly0N8hgrcNrfQ+Jfq1PlrF8=; b=hjRoU2Uv0bfxvDB0T5DOTlMJhT710+UD7ByULpt7UtaESX25BDvgRDMs8hy3GumddS yQ/I1WOC4QbLNgPk7RMkZJqo8xouXsRcgyVXtbRZKKOVNgttO3oPBe9L/UX7KLKPo+hS vFlD6K8P+iqKUVRhRwS4e/3OTkfrEz2miCCA9f/A+I24ClZ6CeavAWWQq2YinxLEZyIE lLnlStFdGeCJAqRSxz+wC9UzC2scm+plxbP2XcyU2ZDKvhg5PkoJkLA5l8o024pbLQne Tde3QtJAwIzt7BAW2Rx+8JLmPuyC+J74dkGcbPMEBJrUGJF/x6JGeMVxARzhSlL6Y1ma zsBA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533EHg5RLIhKQZhuqgsxXal4dDjwWlDsQ6iWXvqVHlyaOx0EvoJ9 /tJsNAyVOonGfRVg0T1sMYo= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyo3Xon7kNxhKd8rJ3xFIJa3CZApE2TioRUy3451bt6GL8ek/IRe81kIyHbTqAH8TPtZ+gcxQ== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:c30a:: with SMTP id t10mr1037787wmf.183.1605252622985; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 23:30:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from normingtong-a01.lan (2.144.199.146.dyn.plus.net. [146.199.144.2]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id n10sm9692988wrv.77.2020.11.12.23.30.21 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 12 Nov 2020 23:30:22 -0800 (PST) From: Glyn Normington Message-Id: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_A6906D08-7F19-4396-8EC4-FDCB0617D64C" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\)) Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2020 07:30:21 +0000 In-Reply-To: Cc: jsonpath@ietf.org To: Daniel P References: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] Remarks on the JSONPath ABNF grammar in draft-goessner-dispatch-jsonpath-00.html X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2020 07:30:26 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_A6906D08-7F19-4396-8EC4-FDCB0617D64C Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Hi Daniel On 12 Nov 2020, at 17:37, Daniel P wrote: >=20 > Note that a slice expression in Goessner is defined with reference to > the (long since abandoned) ECMASCRIPT 4. The original link is lost, > but there is some discussion here, > = https://web.archive.org/web/20070125020659/developer.mozilla.org/es4/propo= sals/slice_syntax.html = . We plugged that gap in the G=C3=B6ssner article thus: = https://jsonpath-standard.github.io/internet-draft/#name-array-selector-2 = which may be a safer starting point for the WG. Regards, Glyn --Apple-Mail=_A6906D08-7F19-4396-8EC4-FDCB0617D64C Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
Hi Daniel

On 12 Nov = 2020, at 17:37, Daniel P <danielaparker@gmail.com> wrote:

Note that a slice expression in = Goessner is defined with reference to
the (long since abandoned) ECMASCRIPT 4. The original link is = lost,
but there is = some discussion here,
https://web.archive.org/web/20070125020659/developer.mozilla.or= g/es4/proposals/slice_syntax.html.

We = plugged that gap in the G=C3=B6ssner article thus:


which may be a safer starting point for the = WG.

Regards,
Glyn

= --Apple-Mail=_A6906D08-7F19-4396-8EC4-FDCB0617D64C-- From nobody Fri Nov 13 16:59:49 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C33D43A10F3 for ; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 16:59:47 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.899 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=textuality-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ecjxAEbGrtTH for ; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 16:59:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-lj1-x235.google.com (mail-lj1-x235.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::235]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4E0923A10F2 for ; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 16:59:46 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-lj1-x235.google.com with SMTP id h23so13067227ljg.13 for ; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 16:59:46 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=textuality-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=LA+ojlN3SLg/pb/nQNu+ZJEA+1TyTJHCC8imptbUXh4=; b=bV2DYwlZrXNc9gILiJvp+hfz35U1iNL1Y93v4IWueMy0Kz/Pc0eWFQ4uZW+isTu0md kz/n89TzsVOrxQHdptHQOiuWIq9JFdF9ZcMPN+xZ78/dNChqjPDZP0bt36bgIBAf8ldo NB9tJSSmGWOQeU2AW+WbBJLTfgAqSzcN/tQ9agFl9NAF/UZ4EishWUSyda0ua8bRhX0A TLVtfOzT1J/DnaUG83PEryZr3t9GvWXOlUwG9e43+ayVeN3/dJqexvHKillWDzlzATRx 0RAIZntFPzbvKmMHkkoR7hFreUv0jshDCXK+H/a4kBvjCfpbW4OUWTS0SFMGP2XyEoaD dzzw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=LA+ojlN3SLg/pb/nQNu+ZJEA+1TyTJHCC8imptbUXh4=; b=Gi5rH12OIyIhp2Bb7QCEGkdhRde1gd5vSwWlPhrTzXv1laBKI4vSvJFjHRXdbuB4bl GE5n9yKSWgrCdZm6+uaE8lgC0CJkHBMSRFxHuCiQPqWrxaUNJNpVNEXhK1NXaxdwF5Cy EB7diENlNcgfRpUhGgwu3Ju7t6/ceQg/aiiqYXwjhLjyhF7z9C0Vx13i/iO/lWjepOGE HTdvemCtY0sXMOhKO8nAMAup5V8yFQn7Fseaje5RnLEf/6PUvgsmoJL3XdT8NtbzcsgM WE5BCSVezsv2ScQzEUsj+BH5nlsVx0VOEpQw+qxw1z26ahIDQxz9ELzTNPi5sCe89jJW MOJQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531bt03Nl9OvYb+cgfNMnHObOZnJDc3+E3EED0DlAj5MonLWDyh0 uBanVX7TXbhx9O72JIzu3z8yJTDvNTE1UN2ajmM2yTOkqdRg6w== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxyn7cmBFdJTP05BKjG1UmEyFAyg0TZ2GnuG2A6lvIOcmhtcnzG/kTU2iIb1HSmQtCm39/gv3qpsgTgFyviutg= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:b54a:: with SMTP id a10mr1957208ljn.139.1605315583927; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 16:59:43 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Tim Bray Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2020 16:59:33 -0800 Message-ID: To: jsonpath@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000021f87605b406a90f" Archived-At: Subject: [Jsonpath] Monday's jsonpath meeting X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2020 00:59:48 -0000 --00000000000021f87605b406a90f Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" We're going to be asking for volunteers for note-taking. Doing this will earn you warm thoughts from your colleagues. Thanks to whomever in advance. --00000000000021f87605b406a90f Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
We&= #39;re going=C2=A0to be asking for volunteers for note-taking. Doing this w= ill earn you warm thoughts from your colleagues. Thanks to whomever in adva= nce.
--00000000000021f87605b406a90f-- From nobody Sat Nov 14 11:31:08 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E87173A127B for ; Sat, 14 Nov 2020 11:31:06 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CoO8F5w3pR1M for ; Sat, 14 Nov 2020 11:31:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wm1-x32a.google.com (mail-wm1-x32a.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::32a]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5BF0A3A1277 for ; Sat, 14 Nov 2020 11:31:05 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wm1-x32a.google.com with SMTP id m125so8466873wmm.3 for ; Sat, 14 Nov 2020 11:31:05 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=4cm2BDLPn5G0sBnNKgCmMWp0jryjg3WxR152XY52qx0=; b=Yu56pWCgE1eA4TPwSutwhjBM32zClmtN3F/37hFIG2gAtonP/BSyPlak7spcmeMgnR zXiXbEaIUoqkBIWj2d5O9cE+FO7yn6txi7HX6dZV/NeWweONvTO0cKaGQ3ureddWRYhM SJtg9OpvcPa4VrJfGmlsLaP6Xzx7TnWC4dw4PM02WQ6h8gj9DMAGhuAfA/D+OE917ysZ szsK7xmyjWA6LlLlUm2XP3xETkAbuJ0qIM4kI/Nv1MWEmUv46iJ4wOHRVoZ6w0XDtbpf RlF49TH7XHIWrAwElXMNxObLNplp6VH4DBREtZhRKE5H5CfocvScH3YgweW1X4wBcJLu u5YQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=4cm2BDLPn5G0sBnNKgCmMWp0jryjg3WxR152XY52qx0=; b=Yi6OBbrinTD92BXSS7iA6vyUQJa1x3ku4kEooxhjJG1mv1UHAiYdN9sBREeCMRreeZ G5Q77HMOH0UQIDrJ0OwDCr4lDZPm5u+n3Tv0EDIXggLW4SLP1iGHS68pofZ7GVuL2f3p 5Ir6JIjMXHGfr/ugWsC1MJZjtZw8igTc7JiyKwmg3rbRteiR5ZQW9D+9bTEsMEjlZb8J yUZGh/j65rKmW++2mkNH4g7Kt9zsiWOIpYurqoXiRaY/ztrk88IusEMDYmtSZfZycVm1 CVR7dnh9P4NTgE0DF5maT84Wlg/2JcuSGvKsH3fYi5eoI66tg3rZA+rNLdn7T9weQ62Y QO9A== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530gJ489EC/kOJ8yKUkl1vtK9UT5JNuugkeNUI1K/5rbtmKyrJ+S woQxjzxM5SSjO4VeNUDBCgC9ylA7p+LEN6NEbu68VuNHbF6cgw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzmPiSgzPQvTutxH49SLlODQuLgQhPzr19gVCuofFa6LjwQazV4neMdauQy9uiaQ1H8GrUtvDHBk6xGPISTrck= X-Received: by 2002:a1c:660b:: with SMTP id a11mr7605876wmc.159.1605382263462; Sat, 14 Nov 2020 11:31:03 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Daniel P Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2020 14:30:51 -0500 Message-ID: To: jsonpath@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: Subject: [Jsonpath] Remarks on the array slice operator described in https://jsonpath-standard.github.io/internet-draft/#name-array-selector-2 X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2020 19:31:07 -0000 > From: Glyn Normington >> On 12 Nov 2020, at 17:37, Daniel P wrote: >> Note that a slice expression in Goessner is defined with reference to >> the (long since abandoned) ECMASCRIPT 4. The original link is lost, >> but there is some discussion here, >>https://web.archive.org/web/20070125020659/developer.mozilla.org/es4/prop= osals/slice_syntax.html. > > We plugged that gap in the G=C3=B6ssner article thus: > > https://jsonpath-standard.github.io/internet-draft/#name-array-selector-2 > > which may be a safer starting point for the WG. > Thanks! The ABNF for an array slice in that reference integer =3D [%x2D] (%x30 / (%x31-39 *%x30-39)) array-slice =3D [ integer ] ws %x3A ws [ integer ] [ ws %x3A ws [ integer ] ] ; start:end or start:end:step is consistent with JMESPath, Python, and my understanding of ECMASCRIPT 4. Perhaps the comment could be expanded to highlight that all integer parts are optional. I think this sentence is awkward: "An array slice is a union element consisting of two or three integers (in base 10 and which may be omitted) separated by colons." More specifically, the use of the term "union element" seems to me to be unnatural and unnecessary. Nothing would be lost by substituting "An array slice consists of ..." Moreover, Goessner uses the term "union" once in https://goessner.net/articles/JsonPath/, and appears to be referring to expressions of the form union =3D "[" ( expression *( "," expression ) ) "]" where minimally one comma is required (Goessner's shorthand notation is [,]= ). Daniel From nobody Sat Nov 14 12:08:17 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 892833A10B3 for ; Sat, 14 Nov 2020 12:08:15 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.897 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WWBWrtNxMxpy for ; Sat, 14 Nov 2020 12:08:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 356823A10A0 for ; Sat, 14 Nov 2020 12:08:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.217.120] (p548dcc60.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.141.204.96]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4CYRGf06JKzySB; Sat, 14 Nov 2020 21:08:09 +0100 (CET) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\)) From: Carsten Bormann In-Reply-To: Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2020 21:08:09 +0100 Cc: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 627077289.443427-ee23ca4129c444c9b492c7971eb4aaa6 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <526A1BBB-17DE-441B-BBD3-3B1F184C366B@tzi.org> References: To: Daniel P X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] Remarks on the array slice operator described in https://jsonpath-standard.github.io/internet-draft/#name-array-selector-2 X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2020 20:08:16 -0000 On 2020-11-14, at 20:30, Daniel P wrote: >=20 >> From: Glyn Normington >>> On 12 Nov 2020, at 17:37, Daniel P wrote: >=20 >>> Note that a slice expression in Goessner is defined with reference = to >>> the (long since abandoned) ECMASCRIPT 4. The original link is lost, >>> but there is some discussion here, >>> = https://web.archive.org/web/20070125020659/developer.mozilla.org/es4/propo= sals/slice_syntax.html. >>=20 >> We plugged that gap in the G=C3=B6ssner article thus: >>=20 >> = https://jsonpath-standard.github.io/internet-draft/#name-array-selector-2 >>=20 >> which may be a safer starting point for the WG. >>=20 > Thanks! The ABNF for an array slice in that reference >=20 > integer =3D [%x2D] (%x30 / (%x31-39 *%x30-39)) >=20 > array-slice =3D [ integer ] ws %x3A ws [ integer ] > [ ws %x3A ws [ integer ] ] > ; start:end or start:end:step Looks good. =46rom an editorial point of view, I=E2=80=99d use a = separate definition DIGIT and DIGIT1 for %x30-39 and %x31-39 for = readability. I=E2=80=99d also use "-" and "0" for the non-range = terminals %x2D and %x30. (It may occasionally be necessary to use hex = outside ranges, i.e., for case-sensitive letters, unless we want to use = the ABNF extensions for case-sensitive letters in RFC 7405 =E2=80=94 = e.g., for the escapes. Please see the end of = https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4997#page-44 for how this can be kept = readable.) > is consistent with JMESPath, Python, and my understanding of > ECMASCRIPT 4. Perhaps the comment could be expanded to highlight that > all integer parts are optional. That is clearly said in the ABNF, but it certainly doesn=E2=80=99t hurt = to spell this out in English as well. (Also, the third colon with the optional integer following is optional.) The most obvious misunderstanding trap that is set up in the above draft = is HEXDIG; this needs a English language comment that the letters A-F = are indeed case-insensitive (i.e., also a-f). > I think this sentence is awkward: >=20 > "An array slice is a union element consisting of two or three integers > (in base 10 and which may be omitted) separated by colons." I think what this is trying to say is that [0:3] is exactly equivalent = to [0, 1, 2], which is a union operator, so the result of [0:3] should = also be what can be called a =E2=80=9Cunion element=E2=80=9D. Detailed = terminology to be fixed... > More specifically, the use of the term "union element" seems to me to > be unnatural and unnecessary. Nothing would be lost by substituting > "An array slice consists of ..." >=20 > Moreover, Goessner uses the term "union" once in > https://goessner.net/articles/JsonPath/, and appears to be referring > to expressions of the form >=20 > union =3D "[" ( expression *( "," expression ) ) "]" >=20 > where minimally one comma is required (Goessner's shorthand notation = is [,]). The ABNF in draft-goessner-dispatch-jsonpath-00.txt merges this case = with the single value-expression case, so [3], [3, 4], and [3, 4, 5] are = handled by the same production, making the result of [3] a (trivial) = union as well. Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten From nobody Mon Nov 16 08:06:01 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 144533A1293 for ; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 08:05:54 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.898 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lBeZ6j50Z4tA for ; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 08:05:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CE4B43A134F for ; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 08:05:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.217.120] (p548dcb31.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.141.203.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4CZYnt1DBBzyYS; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 17:05:38 +0100 (CET) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\)) From: Carsten Bormann In-Reply-To: Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 17:05:37 +0100 Cc: Jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 627235537.517688-7589732eaedd84320426377b4db370d3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <7CDF3863-A09B-4817-B163-B1B77B99A034@tzi.org> References: <906619DA-4C05-4C73-AE27-7AFEB03E8FEA@tzi.org> To: Daniel P X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] Controversial issues X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 16:05:57 -0000 On 2020-11-06, at 01:07, Daniel P wrote: >=20 >> A set of positions is very much like a node set. >=20 > In existing implementations, it is a JSON array of JSON string values. As I pointed out in the meeting today, it *is represented* as a JSON = array. It *is* pretty much a node set. (I was pleading for separating implementation/API issues from the mental = model that we use for describing JSONpath. Multiple APIs can support = different use cases for a single model.) Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten From nobody Mon Nov 16 19:24:30 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 557923A07F0 for ; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 19:24:29 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.087 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.087 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, T_SPF_TEMPERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iyUUgYZKoHLZ for ; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 19:24:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wm1-x32a.google.com (mail-wm1-x32a.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::32a]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EB1123A07F9 for ; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 19:24:23 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wm1-x32a.google.com with SMTP id h21so1859049wmb.2 for ; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 19:24:23 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=iOPvR2bpH62LwTFZYbmWUGeuaQnrQx6XrkiVuKRaLC8=; b=DcUn5Iw1ucU/pvNNyINjiQ8EFi6CR4qSSUmhfdOqKvnRptZmwJKRCjNqM+xUFCYh+2 nfN19FXrOvEOM64PJu8BPsFcL4q58ESI9TepGDRGT8iy/p/vLv0RfLi0hfFMm/02EpF9 sEUAwdrwhNgKJbQ23I1TZIhSWcNvfMSbz2THatUBLtFAcOyeGMcFnpBjCB0vbF20kyJO LmMhuXuzXWRqWZrXKq/sTPUIfEkiatfT47wLu+eY1m9kviMdMDuHGYzaXz4bqBcGAK9i /R5iq/Njmq8E2yqZTGXavoGMbRWuQ4okEd/ka+lmomcA12qCgsEgN0KNF0Es0UTpwzAH BF/Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=iOPvR2bpH62LwTFZYbmWUGeuaQnrQx6XrkiVuKRaLC8=; b=XFyg/Q1lr0PEizHB+j0XoEl9AJuTDy8kmF3l2YaDRp/nSmwDWzslX4+Z6yBX2iShWo NAWq07FZY8r2iuqitTtpTD9qCfKSKevruMtEC8UMXka3hzqxEhURKhbLEqAWz8y2M47h c/2v1qS1rzXTeQ2/RTXKBU5VmYWtpqCQVNcx7jsHNE2/gv5dvw/cFXcs8xEfBHr7MsGg PXz8q+kdwmt9G4jWNTH06hoSQrxpp70lXLiVbYgJF9v2a7dpXm608+D7UK1kTh3oz8wZ i5jsuOSZc0xf3znZDuAmxJqLH1yj2qbZPuyMBKc9mkDSBhYAHSwCQiexorZ/LB8r/9YN n6+A== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531uQ1fcALChWH5/uGHemjTnI4uvIy7BijkmvsFOhnyHr528Hy5N zUUQys8U46iXu/I0//xQv1rOGPtjhXLtAZHd4FQZOr2ApzU= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzmi355KR2EA4KYETmPN16B6+Q8DHZpy/6SLzdv7XMZfowtSav9i2/IyDBUg2y8x3f04Ir3ywRu9V47XQGmGlY= X-Received: by 2002:a7b:c089:: with SMTP id r9mr1826555wmh.45.1605583461914; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 19:24:21 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <906619DA-4C05-4C73-AE27-7AFEB03E8FEA@tzi.org> <7CDF3863-A09B-4817-B163-B1B77B99A034@tzi.org> In-Reply-To: From: Daniel P Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 22:24:09 -0500 Message-ID: To: jsonpath@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Archived-At: Subject: [Jsonpath] Fwd: Node sets, and the meaning thereof X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 03:24:29 -0000 On Mon, Nov 16, 2020 at 11:05 AM Carsten Bormann wrote: > > On 2020-11-06, at 01:07, Daniel P wrote: > > > >> A set of positions is very much like a node set. > > > > In existing implementations, it is a JSON array of JSON string values. > > As I pointed out in the meeting today, it *is represented* as a JSON array. > It *is* pretty much a node set. Okay, I'm clearly not understanding something. Assuming a "node set" is a collection of nodes, what do you mean by "node"? Is it analogous to the use of "Element Node" in the XQuery and XPath Data Model as described in https://www.w3.org/TR/xpath-datamodel-31/#ElementNode? If so, what type of node do you think you need in addition to values that satisfy the JSON value grammar, as described in http://www.ecma-international.org/publications/files/ECMA-ST/ECMA-404.pdf. When you used the term "positions" above, I think you're referring to Goessner's function jsonPath(obj, expr [, args]) that can either return matching values (if args.resultType is "VALUE"), or a list of the normalized path expressions that would produce those values if evaluated against the same JSON object|array (if args.resultType is "PATH"). Is that correct? That by "positions" you mean Goessner's "normalized path expressions"? But why would a function that returns "normalized path expressions" have implications for the JSONPath data model? Thanks, Daniel From nobody Tue Nov 17 01:12:42 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A46363A0BA9 for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 01:12:41 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.895 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.895 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id f_JsT1MYAMtl for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 01:12:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from mailex.mailcore.me (mailex.mailcore.me [94.136.40.144]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9A47E3A0CB9 for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 01:12:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from cpc160115-rdng30-2-0-cust150.15-3.cable.virginm.net ([86.19.35.151] helo=[192.168.0.27]) by smtp03.mailcore.me with esmtpa (Exim 4.92.3) (envelope-from ) id 1kex2T-0006QG-4l; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 09:12:37 +0000 From: Michael Kay Message-Id: <374FE352-EEF8-4462-8285-D04132BF0C4C@saxonica.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_C6AC0580-41B9-4BA1-A5CD-B6F46BB2572A" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.7\)) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 09:12:35 +0000 In-Reply-To: Cc: jsonpath@ietf.org To: Daniel P References: <906619DA-4C05-4C73-AE27-7AFEB03E8FEA@tzi.org> <7CDF3863-A09B-4817-B163-B1B77B99A034@tzi.org> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.7) X-Mailcore-Auth: 439400257 X-Mailcore-Domain: 1881035 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] Node sets, and the meaning thereof X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 09:12:42 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_C6AC0580-41B9-4BA1-A5CD-B6F46BB2572A Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii >=20 > Assuming a "node set" is a collection of nodes, what do you mean by > "node"? Is it analogous to the use of "Element Node" in the XQuery and > XPath Data Model as described in > https://www.w3.org/TR/xpath-datamodel-31/#ElementNode? Indeed, I've been struggling with the same question (not just in the = context of JsonPath, but also in devising primitives to assist with = manipulation of JSON in XPath and XSLT). I think the key difficulty is whether each (key, value) pair in an = object is "a thing" that can be identified and manipulated and = potentially returned. (If we're talking analogies, then it's analogous = to an attribute node in the XDM model). Michael Kay Saxonica= --Apple-Mail=_C6AC0580-41B9-4BA1-A5CD-B6F46BB2572A Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii

Assuming a "node set" is a collection of = nodes, what do you mean by
"node"? Is it analogous to the = use of "Element Node" in the XQuery and
XPath Data Model = as described in
https://www.w3.org/TR/xpath-datamodel-31/#ElementNode?

Indeed, I've been = struggling with the same question (not just in the context of JsonPath, = but also in devising primitives to assist with manipulation of JSON in = XPath and XSLT).

I think the key = difficulty is whether each (key, value) pair in an object is "a thing" = that can be identified and manipulated and potentially returned. (If = we're talking analogies, then it's analogous to an attribute node in the = XDM model).

Michael = Kay
Saxonica
= --Apple-Mail=_C6AC0580-41B9-4BA1-A5CD-B6F46BB2572A-- From nobody Tue Nov 17 07:20:59 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED0093A13FC for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 07:20:56 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.097 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, FREEMAIL_REPLY=1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ARRSzGruWaZ1 for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 07:20:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wm1-x32d.google.com (mail-wm1-x32d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::32d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D7E9D3A13EE for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 07:20:54 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wm1-x32d.google.com with SMTP id c9so3606247wml.5 for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 07:20:54 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=eU0M4JujFh08bq675CQaiS2poUWpvYnfXE4D4MfbtvY=; b=muZQRcWNnlnfHqaM+oiFy913AsTQNVFqGWgL4om04RRA2PTTmc022hn42z5gsM7qYj gqIfV54pGodwRFPHjtHffVBEUJe9fkKc7socSKu/VgUpVHQqk61Mm0eM6pxs+Ys0/aRd qDM9SmGy+lLZGF6L3plcM5KzuWIIvezlo9nrrs5NurvwN7PluY3lYy3Rfu8BT5etU//M m5F2165XWMPfu7KMl+VdOeaCU/XGEOuvL8OYI2g//SE+HA/xuhW2thjZ011V42HtLE2U XXUIkHK1Emd0u8RV/EnfQDMlJQY6nVGLxuYwdK7Ho1Jfj+vD0T2OpmM7hwo271ILdKuQ jEfw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=eU0M4JujFh08bq675CQaiS2poUWpvYnfXE4D4MfbtvY=; b=j1Ouhr0DIYIQUYhbVxfZDSMPrvoEBQapHpO4tE9nZq5MniH572QetyNmFQ2SZO3kqR zDjpn1CBZoYR8/VbWtMTkGd+TuoLV0jSVdYbUlZPnIg3abStkEXzUGWI53wtpothorKL 3okzP1bhmgsLpQRRPQBODrIyL/8xMvMfrv8SzBD46EcNYVnvn+ru7WGJSXBVztfoZAhz mp+eB+TDWInImvYvn4iZ472Xfxksxy3cTbfcI9QZ8O1Sd+gYWgZ5UbQ6Bzq6LO3+yEIR nZVkfCUs5aqG9rZpURoMV5k+EWn/URnwuW0lPOMbbc4+J7Z26atyO7T6vLido71u+W0S l+sw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5302NXc8R7ZplqclE2maTuIQTkoP9NWOEeyv5YsdKP75tR43rDMH fgZCLpOh9QgzvDZ2yYURKbA= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxr0fUHRdGNqaDQbsSwYmHwTroZGDaco0W731sSbIIQF6E5hV4uq2rKCHq98jbdLf1Ypj76pw== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:5446:: with SMTP id p6mr102510wmi.167.1605626453146; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 07:20:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from normingtong-a01.lan (2.144.199.146.dyn.plus.net. [146.199.144.2]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b17sm27856995wru.12.2020.11.17.07.20.52 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 17 Nov 2020 07:20:52 -0800 (PST) From: Glyn Normington Message-Id: <448EAD4C-D46F-40C3-9DAE-B5BB8CA458AA@gmail.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_2B4F7B61-7CDC-4D24-B825-7769E19E58D6" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\)) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 15:20:51 +0000 In-Reply-To: <526A1BBB-17DE-441B-BBD3-3B1F184C366B@tzi.org> Cc: Daniel P , jsonpath@ietf.org To: Carsten Bormann References: <526A1BBB-17DE-441B-BBD3-3B1F184C366B@tzi.org> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] Remarks on the array slice operator described in https://jsonpath-standard.github.io/internet-draft/#name-array-selector-2 X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 15:20:57 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_2B4F7B61-7CDC-4D24-B825-7769E19E58D6 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 The improvements below are welcome. I=E2=80=99ve made one clarification = below. On 14 Nov 2020, at 20:08, Carsten Bormann wrote: >=20 > On 2020-11-14, at 20:30, Daniel P > wrote: >>=20 >>> From: Glyn Normington >>>> On 12 Nov 2020, at 17:37, Daniel P wrote: >>=20 >>>> Note that a slice expression in Goessner is defined with reference = to >>>> the (long since abandoned) ECMASCRIPT 4. The original link is lost, >>>> but there is some discussion here, >>>> = https://web.archive.org/web/20070125020659/developer.mozilla.org/es4/propo= sals/slice_syntax.html. >>>=20 >>> We plugged that gap in the G=C3=B6ssner article thus: >>>=20 >>> = https://jsonpath-standard.github.io/internet-draft/#name-array-selector-2 >>>=20 >>> which may be a safer starting point for the WG. >>>=20 >> Thanks! The ABNF for an array slice in that reference >>=20 >> integer =3D [%x2D] (%x30 / (%x31-39 *%x30-39)) >>=20 >> array-slice =3D [ integer ] ws %x3A ws [ integer ] >> [ ws %x3A ws [ integer ] ] >> ; start:end or start:end:step >=20 > Looks good. =46rom an editorial point of view, I=E2=80=99d use a = separate definition DIGIT and DIGIT1 for %x30-39 and %x31-39 for = readability. I=E2=80=99d also use "-" and "0" for the non-range = terminals %x2D and %x30. (It may occasionally be necessary to use hex = outside ranges, i.e., for case-sensitive letters, unless we want to use = the ABNF extensions for case-sensitive letters in RFC 7405 =E2=80=94 = e.g., for the escapes. Please see the end of = https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4997#page-44 = for how this can be kept = readable.) >=20 >> is consistent with JMESPath, Python, and my understanding of >> ECMASCRIPT 4. Perhaps the comment could be expanded to highlight that >> all integer parts are optional. >=20 > That is clearly said in the ABNF, but it certainly doesn=E2=80=99t = hurt to spell this out in English as well. > (Also, the third colon with the optional integer following is = optional.) >=20 > The most obvious misunderstanding trap that is set up in the above = draft is HEXDIG; this needs a English language comment that the letters = A-F are indeed case-insensitive (i.e., also a-f). >=20 >> I think this sentence is awkward: >>=20 >> "An array slice is a union element consisting of two or three = integers >> (in base 10 and which may be omitted) separated by colons." >=20 > I think what this is trying to say is that [0:3] is exactly equivalent = to [0, 1, 2], which is a union operator, so the result of [0:3] should = also be what can be called a =E2=80=9Cunion element=E2=80=9D. Detailed = terminology to be fixed... I added =E2=80=9Cis a union element" to remind the reader that an array = slice is just one kind of union element. That may not be necessary. I wasn=E2=80=99t thinking of any equivalence between an array slice and = a union of array indices, although that=E2=80=99s an interesting = observation, especially as we address the more general questions of = duplication and ordering. >=20 >> More specifically, the use of the term "union element" seems to me to >> be unnatural and unnecessary. Nothing would be lost by substituting >> "An array slice consists of ..." >>=20 >> Moreover, Goessner uses the term "union" once in >> https://goessner.net/articles/JsonPath/ = , and appears to be referring >> to expressions of the form >>=20 >> union =3D "[" ( expression *( "," expression ) ) "]" >>=20 >> where minimally one comma is required (Goessner's shorthand notation = is [,]). >=20 > The ABNF in draft-goessner-dispatch-jsonpath-00.txt merges this case = with the single value-expression case, so [3], [3, 4], and [3, 4, 5] are = handled by the same production, making the result of [3] a (trivial) = union as well. >=20 > Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten >=20 > --=20 > Jsonpath mailing list > Jsonpath@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonpath = --Apple-Mail=_2B4F7B61-7CDC-4D24-B825-7769E19E58D6 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
The improvements below are welcome. I=E2=80=99ve made one = clarification below.

On 14 Nov = 2020, at 20:08, Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> wrote:

On = 2020-11-14, at 20:30, Daniel P <danielaparker@gmail.com> wrote:

From: Glyn Normington <glyn.normington@gmail.com>
On 12 Nov 2020, at 17:37, Daniel P <danielaparker@gmail.com> wrote:

Note that = a slice expression in Goessner is defined with reference to
the (long since abandoned) ECMASCRIPT 4. The original link is = lost,
but there is some discussion here,
https://web.archive.org/web/20070125020659/developer.mozilla.or= g/es4/proposals/slice_syntax.html.

We plugged that gap in the G=C3=B6ssner article thus:

https://jsonpath-standard.github.io/internet-draft/#name-array-= selector-2

which may be a safer = starting point for the WG.

Thanks! The ABNF for an array slice in that = reference

integer =3D [%x2D] (%x30 / = (%x31-39 *%x30-39))

array-slice =3D [ = integer ] ws %x3A ws [ integer ]
          &nb= sp;      [ ws %x3A ws [ integer ] ]
          &nb= sp;            = ;   ; start:end or start:end:step

Looks good.  =46rom an editorial point of view, I=E2=80=99= d use a separate definition DIGIT and DIGIT1 for %x30-39 and %x31-39 for = readability.  I=E2=80=99d also use "-" and "0" for the non-range = terminals %x2D and %x30.  (It may occasionally be necessary to use = hex outside ranges, i.e., for case-sensitive letters, unless we want to = use the ABNF extensions for case-sensitive letters in RFC 7405 =E2=80=94 = e.g., for the escapes.  Please see the end of https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4997#page-44 for how this can be kept = readable.)

is = consistent with JMESPath, Python, and my understanding of
ECMASCRIPT 4. Perhaps the comment could be expanded to = highlight that
all integer parts are optional.

That is clearly said in the ABNF, but it certainly doesn=E2=80=99= t hurt to spell this out in English as well.
(Also, the third colon with the = optional integer following is optional.)

The most obvious misunderstanding trap that is set up in the = above draft is HEXDIG; this needs a English language comment that the = letters A-F are indeed case-insensitive (i.e., also a-f).

I = think this sentence is awkward:

"An array = slice is a union element consisting of two or three integers
(in base 10 and which may be omitted) separated by = colons."

I think what this is trying to say is that [0:3] is exactly = equivalent to [0, 1, 2], which is a union operator, so the result of = [0:3] should also be what can be called a =E2=80=9Cunion element=E2=80=9D.=  Detailed terminology to be fixed...

I added =E2=80=9Cis a union = element" to remind the reader that an array slice is just = one kind of union element. That may not be necessary.

I wasn=E2=80=99t thinking of any equivalence = between an array slice and a union of array indices, although that=E2=80=99= s an interesting observation, especially as we address the more general = questions of duplication and ordering.


More specifically, the use of the = term "union element" seems to me to
be unnatural and = unnecessary. Nothing would be lost by substituting
"An = array slice consists of ..."

Moreover, = Goessner uses the term "union" once in
https://goessner.net/articles/JsonPath/, and appears to = be referring
to expressions of the form

union =3D "[" ( expression *( "," expression ) ) "]"

where minimally one comma is required = (Goessner's shorthand notation is [,]).

The ABNF in = draft-goessner-dispatch-jsonpath-00.txt merges this case with the single = value-expression case, so [3], [3, 4], and [3, 4, 5] are handled by the = same production, making the result of [3] a (trivial) union as = well.

Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe= , Carsten

-- 
Jsonpath mailing list
Jsonpath@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonpath

= --Apple-Mail=_2B4F7B61-7CDC-4D24-B825-7769E19E58D6-- From nobody Tue Nov 17 19:39:37 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E1AE3A1378 for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 19:39:36 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TxMG-nVQ5lHJ for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 19:39:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wm1-x334.google.com (mail-wm1-x334.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::334]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BDD823A1374 for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 19:39:34 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wm1-x334.google.com with SMTP id s13so1355956wmh.4 for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 19:39:34 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=rmoioz7FRWiW9Cw9Qm4gcoQMc9SYPpiMYlcY5iZaVq0=; b=MzcmxR1BPFwE/+SDkph0XH+xkBvWBKYwWbYQv9pBmc5Zbiliyx4x3VIlJQkgkXZ+Hm kR0x1t3pBlAjurxxhIlspQivyoPThH7wjYfxzTiOeuVwsbwt2TAKxrxrR2aLE03voCcl y4ca/PJjwyVn707Loy4OyNw/xLul3qmNhv4aVQI4nrtbCBCedUx2Xb8F7I7AUqkL+Dt0 HV/iTNm+Bq/Q6W+O/HOlL2oDjZUJU6pNofu25/H28fHlaBcPMVjWTjcjLKRspANg1nCd jJ0US07GXmUQWQOckgj2Wp2KBFwnTawvm4SIQCjYIpNYZ8j9gG9O8+MnkKxG8QVk3CqM 2QHQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=rmoioz7FRWiW9Cw9Qm4gcoQMc9SYPpiMYlcY5iZaVq0=; b=BmJ8zGbsNQ0OB39CHCZsPvInLkAh046QCcYx5K+9PivZ73/L4AS609GPMuyJJBYKfw YqqRYFub5br6l/qcFWeGXHUfsbfKXKk5SAdnkhiLgylBZS+yxeELvHamm9xFFlGAklpM D+ENuguF4ZeVqiKpXsLSfM4zOgb9qu7C9QaO3YWUaI51mTnTPz76mDUMTsHUDF0EB5DY DYam4JzqOM5ZYk5Kx7K6kL4Gl2sitPZHePX9y/UnMymcFDrkR1JNTDX8iExpe1Wf2L0D 2wkgtgK4HTifl8wtkIYyQz9AXKHF1fgus7RfTs8u0D7RV/ljEC0ldn1VNTXBpU5HVY3t uRHQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532DayMh/rZlBuV3tParl+in4OwVnPASegu/Ho6l1vSPnzqQh+6t 7Kp8PNUOzcLiUYJ15zz17f+5xiVhCeR4nmf7K+Lhb0/NDavDHQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxWGWxZqr3rLO3V3xPpmu70eCGE7Z95Ng1nOBvJRASd/bnDAJjGX/8NPMCEKhX8fThu74CcXw6KtYjmRCwrA2A= X-Received: by 2002:a7b:cc95:: with SMTP id p21mr2171552wma.92.1605670772480; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 19:39:32 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Daniel P Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 22:39:20 -0500 Message-ID: To: jsonpath@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: Subject: [Jsonpath] About duplicates, and the question thereof X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 03:39:36 -0000 > From: Glyn Normington > I added =E2=80=9Cis a union element" to remind the reader that an array s= lice is just one kind of > union element. That may not be necessary. But the term "union element" is used in https://jsonpath-standard.github.io/internet-draft/ before it is defined. I think it's better not to use an undefined term when it's not needed. > > I wasn=E2=80=99t thinking of any equivalence between an array slice and a= union of array indices, > although that=E2=80=99s an interesting observati= on, especially as we address the more general > questions of duplication and ordering. > I'd like to understand what you mean by duplicates. Given a JSON array [0,1,1] what would you expect the JSONPath expression $..[0,1,2] to yield? Without duplicates, it would give [0,1], but that's not what the overwhelming majority of implementations yield. Or do you mean something else? Daniel From nobody Tue Nov 17 23:23:33 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8E203A0CA0 for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 23:23:25 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.097 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gggsKxXa-0Rb for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 23:23:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-qv1-xf36.google.com (mail-qv1-xf36.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::f36]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 039F13A0CCF for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 23:23:24 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-qv1-xf36.google.com with SMTP id 63so582941qva.7 for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 23:23:23 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=gs69H2C4vjsSPtqME7w7rFfKdovwl8tRc2/BTZUCeOQ=; b=kgEONEdfQQYY7OwZFnsQbAE0/4Nc6Kwq2C8qUCuTc6aQ77WTxC4yqF2HLhM+TkPqVC D/KIHIrILJVRh5pjODJy0hpC4IQJmFHgBVqWJ6beje8vMfAx/dUIMgL8zyCN72ttWG8O btnGu5y1cvFu/Sq0gQIYuv2Qg9B9fxoHsXo+hXhxFhUYO2ajdWA83F4seFvtDHzbq7Tm 8KO1C/uAv/jYgvS/I0UwMnCcQXYrsiZZP3hHQmUc4p2LjQ43M3FzI47lB4Nd6FW04N4N g4N2M2en0sEljtmQ/PHfb+adgHtnbU86H7osRw3sNepTMm+Lt7HAJueHxEmAeDFLt6vf SuoQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=gs69H2C4vjsSPtqME7w7rFfKdovwl8tRc2/BTZUCeOQ=; b=qYDvBEpCg3qiTw67+an+9ySHTrlJpdwdQ5LhQ+3fNx8OHVkM1Tl6NZZoqt3adORejb BQ8b9qV0uMXDMm6zGODgBt4gy0YasZ+aWWw1klzE6/s/+4Xj/ekzsljRsTP2jK9FlOHB KNLs6zaJX9Z8Xx0VwCPdKaLDIazEPMeDw8JpOlz+K2I+1GhWU/JKW1DNiFUtKQP6KT4j a0Ah5pQ8Msle4a0xZnEiHcBOqiPaAT1GqiaCbunMSmdt8xUzR+/HNWeBzrVzCDf2e3Il yDKqypRXuHIJ69XPeCqStmeeRlsy/oCNjn3xHoSm/S5OS5/qoU0PZf0rK4ajqgKLdqDh Pjig== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530ZDX8KCPGX5oNTwEjLey8vfXqbFzzWa1eCHeAqiZ/NMLiX6j9t ijsQao3gETKZ8P89YMoqNuwgMdxNUpCpNVBwLuA= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxIl7dRSxOccNbKWqz0l60xdzvZfV5zzz3rIGP3O52I+atAKbWMZIsikXQUk3VHJ8YNbVwM0YfuxyrgnS4q53c= X-Received: by 2002:a0c:f254:: with SMTP id z20mr3245055qvl.36.1605684202962; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 23:23:22 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Marko Mikulicic Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 08:23:11 +0100 Message-ID: To: Daniel P Cc: jsonpath@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000008a045c05b45c7c7e" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] About duplicates, and the question thereof X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 07:23:32 -0000 --0000000000008a045c05b45c7c7e Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable It was my impression that we were talking about duplicated nodes not duplicated values: Given th array [10,20,30] $..[0,1,0] Would yield only two results [10, 20] (Not that I'm advocating for removing duplicates, personally I think we shouldn't) On Wed, Nov 18, 2020, 04:39 Daniel P wrote: > > From: Glyn Normington > > > I added =E2=80=9Cis a union element" to remind the reader that an array= slice is > just one kind of > > union element. That may not be necessary. > > But the term "union element" is used in > https://jsonpath-standard.github.io/internet-draft/ before it is > defined. I think it's better not to use an undefined term when it's > not needed. > > > > I wasn=E2=80=99t thinking of any equivalence between an array slice and= a union > of array indices, > although that=E2=80=99s an interesting observation, e= specially > as we address the more general > > questions of duplication and ordering. > > > I'd like to understand what you mean by duplicates. > > Given a JSON array > > [0,1,1] > > what would you expect the JSONPath expression > > $..[0,1,2] > > to yield? Without duplicates, it would give [0,1], but that's not what > the overwhelming majority of implementations yield. Or do you mean > something else? > > Daniel > > -- > Jsonpath mailing list > Jsonpath@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonpath > --0000000000008a045c05b45c7c7e Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
It was my impression that we were talking about dupl= icated nodes not duplicated values:

Given th array [10,20,30= ]

$..[0,1,0]

Would yield only two results [10, 20]
=
(No= t that I'm advocating for removing duplicates, personally I think we sh= ouldn't)


On Wed, Nov 18, 2020, 04:39 Daniel P &l= t;danielaparker@gmail.com>= ; wrote:
> From: Glyn Normington= <glyn.normington.work@gmail.com>

> I added =E2=80=9Cis a union element" to remind the reader that an= array slice is just one kind of
> union element. That may not be necessary.

But the term "union element" is used in
https://jsonpath-standard.github.io/in= ternet-draft/ before it is
defined. I think it's better not to use an undefined term when it's=
not needed.
>
> I wasn=E2=80=99t thinking of any equivalence between an array slice an= d a union of array indices, > although that=E2=80=99s an interesting obs= ervation, especially as we address the more general
> questions of duplication and ordering.
>
I'd like to understand what you mean by duplicates.

Given a JSON array

[0,1,1]

what would you expect the JSONPath expression

$..[0,1,2]

to yield? Without duplicates, it would give [0,1], but that's not what<= br> the overwhelming majority of implementations yield. Or do you mean
something else?

Daniel

--
Jsonpath mailing list
J= sonpath@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonp= ath
--0000000000008a045c05b45c7c7e-- From nobody Tue Nov 17 23:57:49 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CDF93A106C for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 23:57:42 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.898 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hr0VarDGATlt for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 23:57:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1226A3A0FEA for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 23:57:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.217.118] (p548dcb31.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.141.203.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4CbZsj208QzyS9; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 08:57:29 +0100 (CET) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\)) From: Carsten Bormann In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 08:57:28 +0100 Cc: Daniel P , jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 627379048.604341-3449695d078e57f1e77120e5be93a459 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <1C323D96-6921-490F-92F0-268AEE924F7D@tzi.org> References: To: Marko Mikulicic X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] About duplicates, and the question thereof X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 07:57:48 -0000 > On 2020-11-18, at 08:23, Marko Mikulicic wrote: >=20 > It was my impression that we were talking about duplicated nodes not = duplicated values: >=20 > Given th array [10,20,30] >=20 > $..[0,1,0] >=20 > Would yield only two results [10, 20] >=20 > (Not that I'm advocating for removing duplicates, personally I think = we shouldn=E2=80=99t) You=E2=80=99re framing this as =E2=80=9Cremoving duplicates=E2=80=9D. Another view is that [10, 20, 10] would be =E2=80=9Cadding duplicates=E2=80= =9D (copies of the same node). Related are ordering issues: $..[1,0] =E2=9E=94 [20, 10] Or [10, 20] I would expect the spec will leaves implementations some leeway here, = but that should be based on an examination of existing implementations. Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten From nobody Wed Nov 18 00:48:57 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BBA5E3A16AB for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 00:48:55 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Lw5OTFnTaaNu for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 00:48:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-ej1-x62e.google.com (mail-ej1-x62e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::62e]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 662CA3A16A9 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 00:48:54 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ej1-x62e.google.com with SMTP id w13so1556879eju.13 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 00:48:54 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:subject:to:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding:content-language; bh=mAFM57v2SLFg+XT7On9SsqdIdOAagPho1H/eut6N29g=; b=JSsgxYuCblY4KcBvem304LpDEqpT+JDozk3/nQvCBMI5L/0mRGJzKEZRP+DIqmhZoK shhPqAJwvVNvmGG3+HRnjWhM8zO0d5vjenllCvnCRLC/y/KBEitFpZQZURN7zsce0wrT Z92zMJI+fCUZBAPsOwnwWq1+cljAGgRiCzcsM7LNPE/z3O1TbKMhjwZYIbiZT4hK2/mM y7MGqG2jrfPe5qOzWmxduEtNsRZTSj8QYe6rKEvqNH2VKBS0pgAk7D285/4cX5X3nUYO BrZ9R9yNiAHDbf9PQThD+ZSOuG3zrY0V2GnTxMfX++x+cK4S/StiEwDkUlCLc3lb4IfI 21lg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:subject:to:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-language; bh=mAFM57v2SLFg+XT7On9SsqdIdOAagPho1H/eut6N29g=; b=cPPkqUIHxaiXl6aVPYTGggY+F4JIUm66R7vsRz7GgSWM+YcIiqBOWy22FSHnypb2/O xeMvOC4smpNSn0bNsXjEvdKtFpkzIxza0wdmJESM+cnomkdvSFJ9PxpxSASv0j2eqzmW qso3A4JqL5+qyNf/uLdHp0QghpftS/eb1j8hytHoP+4iKk1Es9vHGoBPiB7dP8RV5Lor dJVNYpcXBEXiYGpo5R+rlxjH8YySjdhRH/Jl8oYL7HhZLL5I4TPlgTWrfggeKo5jK6rI bgBp8f6nhRJIa6oKTiQZLKta90s7mAqLhRJxW7dl0xJ4yMPEsW9vooilMVG4CIsLVc6l JtsQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532vrMrx+lL3+cGVZF+dBT+hJxelj6K32RZcG3pY5zUMksmR8p/o Hb862rr3TzlKKEjOfY9cBPPenrTbk4v97Q== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxcT1FS/t7h+ugGp/9KgI7Nd7IovrEhJrELkwCO8cvl0IKC9gC4PtJ/uRxcri2PLF1vnBKUoA== X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:4704:: with SMTP id y4mr14580302ejq.449.1605689332545; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 00:48:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from TTA4265.fritz.box ([2001:984:65b0:2:c41f:c770:ca8e:247c]) by smtp.gmail.com with UTF8SMTPSA id y12sm12515932ejj.95.2020.11.18.00.48.51 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 18 Nov 2020 00:48:52 -0800 (PST) From: James To: jsonpath@ietf.org Message-ID: <529de287-c109-4dba-5d76-242b6de6e9d8@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 09:48:51 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.16; rv:83.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/83.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Language: en-US Archived-At: Subject: [Jsonpath] IETF 109 JSONPath draft minutes X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 08:48:56 -0000 Draft minutes of the IETF 109 JSONPath meeting are now on Datatracker: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/minutes-109-jsonpath/ Thank you to Michael Richardson for taking notes and the others who also contributed. Please send any corrections to the chairs. Thanks - J From nobody Wed Nov 18 01:11:27 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D85FA3A16CF for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 01:11:25 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.896 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.896 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cNrCCd9ZpkyZ for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 01:11:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from ppsw-31.csi.cam.ac.uk (ppsw-31.csi.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.131]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 50A323A16CE for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 01:11:24 -0800 (PST) X-Cam-AntiVirus: no malware found X-Cam-ScannerInfo: http://help.uis.cam.ac.uk/email-scanner-virus Received: from grey.csi.cam.ac.uk ([131.111.57.57]:57090) by ppsw-31.csi.cam.ac.uk (ppsw.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.137]:25) with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) id 1kfJUm-000Y2m-LU (Exim 4.92.3) (return-path ); Wed, 18 Nov 2020 09:11:20 +0000 Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 09:11:20 +0000 From: Tony Finch To: Carsten Bormann cc: Marko Mikulicic , jsonpath@ietf.org, Daniel P In-Reply-To: <1C323D96-6921-490F-92F0-268AEE924F7D@tzi.org> Message-ID: References: <1C323D96-6921-490F-92F0-268AEE924F7D@tzi.org> User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] About duplicates, and the question thereof X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 09:11:26 -0000 Carsten Bormann wrote: > > I would expect the spec will leaves implementations some leeway here, I think that would be a mistake: if I ask for multiple items and I can't predict what order they will be returned in, or whether duplicate items will be present or not, how will I be able to use the result? Tony. -- f.anthony.n.finch http://dotat.at/ Selsey Bill to Lyme Regis: South veering west 5 to 7, occasionally gale 8 later. Moderate, becoming rough later. Rain for a time. Good, occasionally moderate. From nobody Wed Nov 18 01:13:57 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 747673A16D6 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 01:13:56 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.897 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pBitOB0kJ0yd for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 01:13:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ED9813A16D4 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 01:13:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.217.118] (p548dcb31.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.141.203.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4CbcYm5QTWzyS9; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 10:13:48 +0100 (CET) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\)) From: Carsten Bormann In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 10:13:48 +0100 Cc: jsonpath@ietf.org, Marko Mikulicic , Daniel P X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 627383628.009954-3a4b119dd79d88bea4f4ba01356fef1b Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <120F28C0-467A-40C5-9073-C60A50909DC1@tzi.org> References: <1C323D96-6921-490F-92F0-268AEE924F7D@tzi.org> To: Tony Finch X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] About duplicates, and the question thereof X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 09:13:56 -0000 > On 2020-11-18, at 10:11, Tony Finch wrote: >=20 > Carsten Bormann wrote: >>=20 >> I would expect the spec will leaves implementations some leeway here, >=20 > I think that would be a mistake: That is a perfectly valid position, and we need to make up our mind = about that. > if I ask for multiple items and I can't > predict what order they will be returned in, or whether duplicate = items > will be present or not, how will I be able to use the result? How do you use JSONpath today? Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten From nobody Wed Nov 18 02:49:02 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66F6A3A1798 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 02:49:00 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.896 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.896 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MVviKfivgcjq for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 02:48:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from ppsw-30.csi.cam.ac.uk (ppsw-30.csi.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.130]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 41E6B3A1797 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 02:48:53 -0800 (PST) X-Cam-AntiVirus: no malware found X-Cam-ScannerInfo: http://help.uis.cam.ac.uk/email-scanner-virus Received: from grey.csi.cam.ac.uk ([131.111.57.57]:51702) by ppsw-30.csi.cam.ac.uk (ppsw.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.136]:25) with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) id 1kfL1A-000Cf4-dE (Exim 4.92.3) (return-path ); Wed, 18 Nov 2020 10:48:52 +0000 Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 10:48:52 +0000 From: Tony Finch To: Carsten Bormann cc: jsonpath@ietf.org, Marko Mikulicic , Daniel P In-Reply-To: <120F28C0-467A-40C5-9073-C60A50909DC1@tzi.org> Message-ID: References: <1C323D96-6921-490F-92F0-268AEE924F7D@tzi.org> <120F28C0-467A-40C5-9073-C60A50909DC1@tzi.org> User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] About duplicates, and the question thereof X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 10:49:00 -0000 Carsten Bormann wrote: > > How do you use JSONpath today? I don't use JSONpath as such :-) but I do use adjacent things like jq and the SQL/JSON path language (which have clear semantics for handling multiple values), and gron (which uses a simplified JSONpath-like syntax). Tony. -- f.anthony.n.finch http://dotat.at/ Rockall: Cyclonic 5 to 7, becoming northwest 7 to severe gale 9. Rough or very rough, becoming high for a time. Showers. Moderate or poor. From nobody Wed Nov 18 03:21:15 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66AC53A0EC4 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 03:21:14 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.097 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5q-3jhtAPMBW for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 03:21:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wm1-x334.google.com (mail-wm1-x334.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::334]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4EF8C3A17B7 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 03:21:11 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wm1-x334.google.com with SMTP id 1so2360736wme.3 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 03:21:11 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=fWKPIRY1oKDrL2k7+5FtetpIvlUqya/SFYBPqECHKow=; b=GOmiI08LCH3Ed67+oCB3JtWcUyi+pHANMDLwB3lcdP6NETvsvn93x1l0sF18xS8y9D fC9bZMs02NjyLwoI0MBPTBSy8SK/G7kKaLoOqjT3QwGI3MccgxyOXhSaolicOaShqVPB xnyI8Z1iNeUFRDnXD+R7gdHpmsxaSpAQt1AsNw+cYWZQWiynqX69CKSKPDsGR73vvjIL bnyvaD0NPudTOPrnjpvcmgqhmoayH9Y52tcPi86lWxX8xhoVw8hcEHBnbtqIYKAcsBzU 5miKUx85SeMmNBgGB9mR2Ao2hQdWP/AH2OLDF2qmLqdAXSfM7ZAwcYTF0M32OYlXempB ovGg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=fWKPIRY1oKDrL2k7+5FtetpIvlUqya/SFYBPqECHKow=; b=gcz4fPznabNS6lrTt8XFRxhsBXdV2m/BuWRWsaPLp+B94NL6AkybrwbJ1MiYD+//mx o3bt9emIOp3hJr927tKi1DPlfU0A5EKfJW/ia0At1q537ttOxHaIemSbDrxSVHSpc9Wy FmG8F2hlRAYJ5rtKUH9e/+4hxXbU5WiyXvr2FAjeQ1IHIdm9SxT5s0x5BUYnfKGJEig1 kOvVYucDOv3OF6z+/LG6x8MtD64Z4nBsHPvzGEWPzyFeT1II7ivfIcAu5fo+P+09SYqJ P6su4Ptq3Vq7LGR4N7mBlA0qnbeOdNoN3wvPFtUPhzJcEpPc4VgIkC+/NjiJORkt+KOh QlOw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533DdU2xmX6Al17gT1RbM6S7LM2BdqqONIyZqrusOqTxQXuPc4U5 RQbgm8xR44o5xxck13sscDM= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwuyhzLoxp/CxlOwA4qnTgrRmxD7Jn/LFF7wtaSxSMDS3W7iAmDLPEzSpWPiB1pbT4FM4pQQQ== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:f612:: with SMTP id w18mr4022527wmc.11.1605698469696; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 03:21:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from normingtong-a01.lan (2.144.199.146.dyn.plus.net. [146.199.144.2]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id w1sm3040335wmi.24.2020.11.18.03.21.08 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 18 Nov 2020 03:21:08 -0800 (PST) From: Glyn Normington Message-Id: <65B5AD06-FB21-42E8-9E8B-8E070D7B1099@gmail.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_AAE001B2-63E0-4CE3-8693-6233732B0C12" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\)) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 11:21:08 +0000 In-Reply-To: Cc: jsonpath@ietf.org To: Daniel P References: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4) Archived-At: Subject: [Jsonpath] Definition before use [was: Re: About duplicates, and the question thereof] X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 11:21:14 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_AAE001B2-63E0-4CE3-8693-6233732B0C12 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 (breaking out a separate thread so as not to distract from the main = discussion in the previous thread) > On 18 Nov 2020, at 03:39, Daniel P wrote: >=20 >> From: Glyn Normington > >=20 >> I added =E2=80=9Cis a union element" to remind the reader that an = array slice is just one kind of >> union element. That may not be necessary. >=20 > But the term "union element" is used in > https://jsonpath-standard.github.io/internet-draft/ = before it is > defined. I think it's better not to use an undefined term when it's > not needed. I agree that definition before use is good practice for specs, but ABNF = is typically presented "top-down=E2=80=9D, so there=E2=80=99s a bit of a = tension. Perhaps a reasonable compromise in this case would be to define =E2=80=9Cu= nion element=E2=80=9D in general terms when it is first referred to, = alluding to the alternative types of union element, but then continue to = add the alternatives incrementally in later sections. What do you, and = others, think?= --Apple-Mail=_AAE001B2-63E0-4CE3-8693-6233732B0C12 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 (breaking out a separate thread so as not to distract from = the main discussion in the previous thread)

On 18 = Nov 2020, at 03:39, Daniel P <danielaparker@gmail.com> wrote:

From: = Glyn Normington <glyn.normington.work@gmail.com>

I added =E2=80=9Cis a union element" = to remind the reader that an array slice is just one kind of
union element. That may not be necessary.

But the term "union element" is used in
https://jsonpath-standard.github.io/internet-draft/ before it is
defined. I think it's better not = to use an undefined term when it's
not needed.

I agree that definition before use is good = practice for specs, but ABNF is typically presented "top-down=E2=80=9D, = so there=E2=80=99s a bit of a tension.

Perhaps a reasonable compromise in this = case would be to define =E2=80=9Cunion element=E2=80=9D in general terms = when it is first referred to, alluding to the alternative types of union = element, but then continue to add the alternatives incrementally in = later sections. What do you, and others, think?
= --Apple-Mail=_AAE001B2-63E0-4CE3-8693-6233732B0C12-- From nobody Wed Nov 18 03:29:33 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 918373A181B for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 03:29:25 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.897 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SUqGPPXz78x2 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 03:29:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DDECC3A1801 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 03:29:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.217.120] (p548dcb31.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.141.203.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4CbgZ82p3nz10ZM; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 12:29:20 +0100 (CET) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\)) From: Carsten Bormann In-Reply-To: <65B5AD06-FB21-42E8-9E8B-8E070D7B1099@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 12:29:19 +0100 Cc: Daniel P , jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 627391759.801005-224a6fba12d4327fe642dc31aef0b059 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <87C4704B-BD63-4C5B-8738-6E2D1B4E7C59@tzi.org> References: <65B5AD06-FB21-42E8-9E8B-8E070D7B1099@gmail.com> To: Glyn Normington X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] Definition before use [was: Re: About duplicates, and the question thereof] X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 11:29:31 -0000 On 2020-11-18, at 12:21, Glyn Normington = wrote: >=20 > (breaking out a separate thread so as not to distract from the main = discussion in the previous thread) >=20 >> On 18 Nov 2020, at 03:39, Daniel P wrote: >>=20 >>> From: Glyn Normington >>=20 >>> I added =E2=80=9Cis a union element" to remind the reader that an = array slice is just one kind of >>> union element. That may not be necessary. >>=20 >> But the term "union element" is used in >> https://jsonpath-standard.github.io/internet-draft/ before it is >> defined. I think it's better not to use an undefined term when it's >> not needed. >=20 > I agree that definition before use is good practice for specs, but = ABNF is typically presented "top-down=E2=80=9D, so there=E2=80=99s a bit = of a tension. >=20 > Perhaps a reasonable compromise in this case would be to define = =E2=80=9Cunion element=E2=80=9D in general terms when it is first = referred to, alluding to the alternative types of union element, but = then continue to add the alternatives incrementally in later sections. = What do you, and others, think? We usually have definitions/terminology sections (Section 2 in most = cases), which is where terms can be defined. Top-down ABNF is fine if the production names have been chosen with that = in mind (i.e., don=E2=80=99t call it k93yq but hexdig etc.). Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten From nobody Wed Nov 18 03:43:20 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0F8B3A17D4 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 03:43:18 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.097 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vcwhn7a9hnYU for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 03:43:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wm1-x32a.google.com (mail-wm1-x32a.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::32a]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D280C3A10F1 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 03:43:16 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wm1-x32a.google.com with SMTP id 10so2703987wml.2 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 03:43:16 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=ihSBypF5DPduZflcl/8L50pUgHrI5YLzQ4a21Qu56XY=; b=ZGpKMzPZ9oyD52xrbQKfXHNGV+1SRmHuoXZ52+3G9snKWBaDmWMat2fG7GCNgeDIuM RrosRgyORN68Qr7Z4U4/5jOm9SAHbEmdcnp8cx59K7SfnI1E9wvoUiwGEEFRlhKQaLt8 bf1sApNIyMYjQcjNzH2/vCKQSRNgSO1Wmq0Dkp6E9QYW8uS3P5wvuGxKFr7V6XthKJ7c JOOgqFFe8/iFHaKwpg2DmEnkP73d+SBxgWWwGVCSpd3oww7F6PT2BOvcaixrTn2EWPET wO35OLwrmqupOIzHTnwsEM1M21md9hRmLWNZg5L3e4VGL8zZpxs/GzpuaxayD7kNRaFF jyVw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=ihSBypF5DPduZflcl/8L50pUgHrI5YLzQ4a21Qu56XY=; b=n7kp72jRe+22Rti6Po7uQjAPA+Pdk+K3YCbJCcJsNjQ2nk8pOAfySfwW36sakiGQm4 U9Etv1juwIUhyZuOFvOrHnIOSbLArpm3Emtd6kI/z14QalwTS7FGOq4fHk3dxg9CDCqC 5tPlXjNscp5k8A1eXrFA7ieCJw+opeO0mQUmoE7OlztyYz6hKArNkKcD50ikBz3CArT9 x6NVXY1EFRJkY3MidAyYZEdAib9luUUOMooNRXDSGL6LK2DGxTx+V+s734lk6I88CaSr gFb09h7eiUlCI8r/03ZQSofwkuLKnd9ev7DxeSNxWxZ7LZrfhwyGSk0OR4c0lwHljKF/ Lpbg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533JPZrpc2IfgaXmBlzjYjafvwHz5xZ70s2BZsCBZI3M8Gvg4TSY ZuTFNaHHYn2NCGkbLbvoIR8= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyST9fp6dRfAvNVvoIWRYfOldbwSWsN6+Q47z+mAVvsMyLlANLtpNUZp2rfIcFm/doaHID2og== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:230e:: with SMTP id j14mr3882724wmj.187.1605699795275; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 03:43:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from normingtong-a01.lan (2.144.199.146.dyn.plus.net. [146.199.144.2]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id q17sm37993167wro.36.2020.11.18.03.43.14 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 18 Nov 2020 03:43:14 -0800 (PST) From: Glyn Normington Message-Id: <681FAB3F-60A3-41FB-AB32-5B2BBA6284B9@gmail.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_84B05BFB-A49C-4C9D-9B03-8B3AC7BC1F1A" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\)) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 11:43:13 +0000 In-Reply-To: <87C4704B-BD63-4C5B-8738-6E2D1B4E7C59@tzi.org> Cc: jsonpath@ietf.org, Daniel P To: Carsten Bormann References: <65B5AD06-FB21-42E8-9E8B-8E070D7B1099@gmail.com> <87C4704B-BD63-4C5B-8738-6E2D1B4E7C59@tzi.org> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] Definition before use [was: Re: About duplicates, and the question thereof] X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 11:43:19 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_84B05BFB-A49C-4C9D-9B03-8B3AC7BC1F1A Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 On 18 Nov 2020, at 11:29, Carsten Bormann wrote: >=20 > On 2020-11-18, at 12:21, Glyn Normington = > = wrote: >>=20 >> (breaking out a separate thread so as not to distract from the main = discussion in the previous thread) >>=20 >>> On 18 Nov 2020, at 03:39, Daniel P wrote: >>>=20 >>>> From: Glyn Normington >>>=20 >>>> I added =E2=80=9Cis a union element" to remind the reader that an = array slice is just one kind of >>>> union element. That may not be necessary. >>>=20 >>> But the term "union element" is used in >>> https://jsonpath-standard.github.io/internet-draft/ before it is >>> defined. I think it's better not to use an undefined term when it's >>> not needed. >>=20 >> I agree that definition before use is good practice for specs, but = ABNF is typically presented "top-down=E2=80=9D, so there=E2=80=99s a bit = of a tension. >>=20 >> Perhaps a reasonable compromise in this case would be to define = =E2=80=9Cunion element=E2=80=9D in general terms when it is first = referred to, alluding to the alternative types of union element, but = then continue to add the alternatives incrementally in later sections. = What do you, and others, think? >=20 > We usually have definitions/terminology sections (Section 2 in most = cases), which is where terms can be defined. I agree Section 2 is a good place to define general terms which need to = be understood before reading the spec, but in this case, I think it=E2=80=99= s simpler to define "union elements" in the section on unions. I doubt = we=E2=80=99ll need to use the term outside that section. If we defined = "union element" in Section 2, we=E2=80=99d need to define =E2=80=9Cunion=E2= =80=9D there too and I worry that we=E2=80=99ll get into too much detail = too early. >=20 > Top-down ABNF is fine if the production names have been chosen with = that in mind (i.e., don=E2=80=99t call it k93yq but hexdig etc.). >=20 > Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten >=20 > --=20 > Jsonpath mailing list > Jsonpath@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonpath = --Apple-Mail=_84B05BFB-A49C-4C9D-9B03-8B3AC7BC1F1A Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 On = 18 Nov 2020, at 11:29, Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> wrote:

On = 2020-11-18, at 12:21, Glyn Normington <glyn.normington.work@gmail.com> wrote:

(breaking out a = separate thread so as not to distract from the main discussion in the = previous thread)

On 18 Nov 2020, at 03:39, Daniel P <danielaparker@gmail.com> wrote:

From: Glyn Normington = <glyn.normington.work@gmail.com>

I added =E2=80=9Cis a union element" to remind the reader = that an array slice is just one kind of
union element. = That may not be necessary.

But = the term "union element" is used in
https://jsonpath-standard.github.io/internet-draft/ = before it is
defined. I think it's better not to use an = undefined term when it's
not needed.

I agree that definition before = use is good practice for specs, but ABNF is typically presented = "top-down=E2=80=9D, so there=E2=80=99s a bit of a tension.

Perhaps a reasonable compromise in this case = would be to define =E2=80=9Cunion element=E2=80=9D in general terms when = it is first referred to, alluding to the alternative types of union = element, but then continue to add the alternatives incrementally in = later sections. What do you, and others, think?

We usually have definitions/terminology sections (Section 2 = in most cases), which is where terms can be defined.

I agree = Section 2 is a good place to define general terms which need to be = understood before reading the spec, but in this case, I think it=E2=80=99s= simpler to define "union elements" in the section on unions. I doubt = we=E2=80=99ll need to use the term outside that section. If we defined = "union element" in Section 2, we=E2=80=99d need to define =E2=80=9Cunion=E2= =80=9D there too and I worry that we=E2=80=99ll get into too much detail = too early.


Top-down ABNF = is fine if the production names have been chosen with that in mind = (i.e., don=E2=80=99t call it k93yq but hexdig etc.).

Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, = Carsten

-- 
Jsonpath mailing list
Jsonpath@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonpath

= --Apple-Mail=_84B05BFB-A49C-4C9D-9B03-8B3AC7BC1F1A-- From nobody Wed Nov 18 03:46:13 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2603E3A1043 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 03:46:12 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.097 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3-bLsoz52OzH for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 03:46:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wr1-x433.google.com (mail-wr1-x433.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::433]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7B18A3A0DAD for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 03:46:10 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wr1-x433.google.com with SMTP id r17so1944035wrw.1 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 03:46:10 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:mime-version:subject:message-id:date:to; bh=DC2AcVJXQg2HI3ahvhF7pHErWqiV260mZhe0uNa/ytQ=; b=efO7Q2MFZMJO1/KOnPv13nR1FMRqw8lh8PLq7HBjI1G7DYSieCCFiTspr28mGUY9GD FJeqk8n/arv12BM385adOLPxyZU86Hrxmdip+4FPZM56RdacIcqv7/3WgYHI2VUWMVW0 tssDxcAgjMBgvg2X5YpsbHUF2LsjXV+uvBH29nTSjufwnlBIOw3fiXfwika609JfVK0L QQS6xJMzbJ/4wprO343fHdyUN285P/0JRep/Sul4GZJR1d/y4TOcAz7fqgAJz7JnKoyo GeHb1zmaO4TFwGWrAzF9AhBXPInvNJW98JU6cjUxp9Blb6xkCdC4UoHfJtTNJmRG6lO/ GH2Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:mime-version:subject:message-id:date:to; bh=DC2AcVJXQg2HI3ahvhF7pHErWqiV260mZhe0uNa/ytQ=; b=lnv4GvcRS/QQnRsrdRv70LfeOArMkPI5tgB/MwcalD3CGONuIjtUO6xd9zBO2SzG6d r9TYK+huIXbXfYLy+k3+zCqFRRvQrQyY3wAuAdq3QDWFAgNGZZo4VpppOWeCbwzHbG1m HksR1SsUnbvlAD23fHTapgYlKG2sl8bC2i3kQ2qLuRdu5j+xFXWqu6l/XUur+N2A8we9 kn9E2r2F2EsSbeXvNWz8510aehlx6O4yB95cIQlDVu1RnjRBZImRbaXxfc8mTLOM5/Pq yGsRDbApWPCeamc8Fl+lSs2DJtVsDl3xr2ZiuupnJSp1NF788iG1+6EhxzAIoB8jJ/BB /vtA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530O8DmwVzXkaycdufxe4KQZxy1WOdlNqeYUBt/vLt9P3RHVnp7+ l284VmO5H7O6Z97ofnW1LnJI6AzZXWLJ9k0E X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwOOAlknfE/Eswx3wwuXlfOcagjHahPM/GgS3yOfTuNXujnILKcEM400GFQu/6kZnvkMgFELQ== X-Received: by 2002:adf:9407:: with SMTP id 7mr4681231wrq.182.1605699968370; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 03:46:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from normingtong-a01.lan (2.144.199.146.dyn.plus.net. [146.199.144.2]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id i11sm33975755wro.85.2020.11.18.03.46.07 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 18 Nov 2020 03:46:07 -0800 (PST) From: Glyn Normington Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_AE16DF80-3FD7-43D1-B6F7-17C651F01AF3" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\)) Message-Id: Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 11:46:07 +0000 To: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4) Archived-At: Subject: [Jsonpath] Merging the drafts X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 11:46:12 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_AE16DF80-3FD7-43D1-B6F7-17C651F01AF3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Following on from the Working Group meeting at IETF 109, Carsten and I = are working on merging the two existing drafts. The goal is to create a = merged document that the Working Group will hopefully decide to adopt as = a starting point. We started by converting [1] to markdown, for simpler editing and PR = review. Once IETF 109 is over, we=E2=80=99ll start adding selected = material from [2]. We=E2=80=99ll do that using pull requests and try to = leave each PR open for at least a day so that everyone has the = opportunity to comment, suggest improvements, etc. Of course, the merged = result won=E2=80=99t be set in stone, so there will be ample opportunity = to improve the text after the merge is complete.=20 Regards, Glyn [1] https://github.com/jsonpath-standard/internet-draft = [2] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-goessner-dispatch-jsonpath-00 = --Apple-Mail=_AE16DF80-3FD7-43D1-B6F7-17C651F01AF3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
Following on from the Working Group = meeting at IETF 109, Carsten and I are working on merging the two = existing drafts. The goal is to create a merged document that = the Working Group will hopefully decide to adopt as a starting = point.

We = started by converting [1] to markdown, for simpler editing and PR = review. Once IETF 109 is over, we=E2=80=99ll start adding selected = material from [2]. We=E2=80=99ll do that using pull requests and try to = leave each PR open for at least a day so that everyone has the = opportunity to comment, suggest improvements, etc. Of course, the merged = result won=E2=80=99t be set in stone, so there will be ample opportunity = to improve the text after the merge is complete. 

Regards,
Glyn

[1] https://github.com/jsonpath-standard/internet-draft
[2] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-goessner-dispatch-jsonpath-00=


= --Apple-Mail=_AE16DF80-3FD7-43D1-B6F7-17C651F01AF3-- From nobody Wed Nov 18 05:59:27 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0F0D3A07BD for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 05:59:25 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3W2yP0jFwHZh for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 05:59:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wm1-x336.google.com (mail-wm1-x336.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::336]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BE2B23A0773 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 05:59:23 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wm1-x336.google.com with SMTP id s13so2810827wmh.4 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 05:59:23 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=lnEEg3/601xGMaRbIgUUdPz15iUUt1Zx96rTHJuv8S4=; b=GyUZKRQMb1FHuKCmBg8NwJX6s9tALcagW650wsl9L4jHCeI7VfJFaoZLNVFo8Clleg WxCuLdl2jmhL0VJ6oQtuG2sRzM/HojcnjrePwm8ER66BNTol7GL2MeCxrFvGgWaOQ1YQ UJKAhheCDg1cTAjFz+B8cr1rb2I6RTRHd0Xml8sb98j+4LJKP00HOu5OU5Syw4gp+I6M 8fD1k5ctk5eFWddYSj1eGobpIiHsPsScxDJwNBxv+1+AgjOHgXfhPUNk9vvC1Bi4bT7d EGijWFdBjXRnfXbFlpv7F5lr4oiIkSUqnGZsfeioGw0pP3AYslEEceZRiGwzPSbzpqCn B+jg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=lnEEg3/601xGMaRbIgUUdPz15iUUt1Zx96rTHJuv8S4=; b=mTVDSeOGfSLptMRGGVhIEFGITWSnh2azXnqoZ6eydFCrRMApY82n6he0SeJ07xfgkR V9dhjiaXpgspPIXm+Zio3xsw8s2KsdQsSwq3ABLMjgpMKkHnRyi12/MFAAg+HQDqawd8 k1QtkaK/3kLEUgtPAjwvg5UWCvxzwHXvYlYV7fwebZjBWDHvNLjZm+Wh3QeQZhPJbHiM nx+DErADYDhRQrlUTWL3zb3o+DyFB4NBHZyzFlvJczJcZLsvHOLnGxL98iysowi/diMY f1rW3vrMoO+UvVM1S53fXpPm6dv9sequ/GoFHCS2Y8egNDlKZFliSOFqZ0uVpXtEdfDU crwQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532C1JkOhOcuSDNSphdd6eLaouH4uF5SMRHbwGS4cKxc39ZcUg7q 5oYXCzPO+FCSXXBj8OEqgoEKr10ENEP5cYJKodCjqNIo4IFLIw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwplj93H+snt1uXbESpt49fWN9y1tknO3kMviybUnmZb+ymw5e7vf8A9Gye/3C2ldORH3xq2YfNR+WLhOULvNg= X-Received: by 2002:a1c:660b:: with SMTP id a11mr123849wmc.159.1605707961641; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 05:59:21 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Daniel P Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 08:59:09 -0500 Message-ID: To: jsonpath@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] Jsonpath Digest, Vol 5, Issue 16 X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 13:59:26 -0000 > From: Marko Mikulicic > It was my impression that we were talking about duplicated nodes not duplicated values: > Okay. Terms are being used in ways that are not clear (to me), hence my question. > Given the array [10,20,30] > > $..[0,1,0] > > Would yield only two results [10, 20] > > (Not that I'm advocating for removing duplicates, personally I think we shouldn't) > > It's hard to see how a standardized JSONPath could, as my understanding is that most legacy implementations do not. An exception may be npm jsonpath, https://www.npmjs.com/package/jsonpath. The section "Other Minor Differences [from Stefan Goessner's original implementation]" includes the text: "unions now yield real unions with no duplicates rather than concatenated results". In npm jsonpath, given the array [10,20,30,30], $..[0,1,0] yields [10,20] and $..[1,2,3] yields [20,30,30] Daniel From nobody Wed Nov 18 07:19:31 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13C513A0AF5 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 07:19:30 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.097 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2zJVG6GyFRQB for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 07:19:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wr1-x431.google.com (mail-wr1-x431.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::431]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 266973A0AF6 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 07:19:28 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wr1-x431.google.com with SMTP id s8so2530788wrw.10 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 07:19:28 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=kRzmCrvkcHUNzEKTheOq7alkt+uEvOy6qLJjclGDPX4=; b=sskzdl1IO4gbi1gDuO3EjbxUoKsTAcxpn/yAZOvjwSaIStdjDOAZ47LDXL7qUpKsnH +0dFagNRkA2vMb0GdVEBh/ygvUNCqy7wduABnMoqIgWZAmrxrxr80LT3EjXQn3jYPlrX MhdEWH8ujFcvN+2qrbW3u/6v81hPUm1qgOKGFkxHx97Zp/EQ5RkxLAnrigHjaE0ncEhR ClyjTjcCDmMrANewAFIXU0s0gj6Eu73OFFlnydkv1vvhtqk8A9l3MeINRTzxepdrDOI+ akYOSdQhT2w0Nn5biluA6zCetQh3/eB/WDEu53WewpGFsvz3KuBP814XkWVl3sYtw7Du mU6A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=kRzmCrvkcHUNzEKTheOq7alkt+uEvOy6qLJjclGDPX4=; b=L7QqUosWykKjLd1W6uz8cz5qrj5kpxYSfv8qMUzDWWqSty31Ts9F2AUvTANNPMYhHV MiO4SkBx2hLjPq3fIHfQfDAoZvc7ZAe8F+CUaRBhXqwnWHmf4i5HbGki+9cJbMEU652r O6kN7RApLkuoephwcGpvj88NveNhTEFHXn/Yz44lgaAPovIJLHacG4Au/Hljkriw8AYB 9n7dk2wwBixyVsC96KUj4yTaBRpDfDXGk/6q6VLhIheQ4Gwhfa1Dzm64OqGeu3BeGVOB 0+GbIWp1lVyJThXSYv0jEvZ5eXo9Jr11G6aSraUJEcWV+iQnLov98P+McGzgA3bRAGYn eVkg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530S6gUsvJuzvoOZyrtp9cCKa9ZgvNq2JxLT0TASX95sJD5Ui6/O BXJBA6MJoddmTmpM6tel7V8= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwWSP9ab5sBTXI9bVAfOzOyH59Z5/kfRsAAXe2VIZ5jBeUVfKA0bp/QxAxAKtQXgTOGgIfDPg== X-Received: by 2002:adf:f2ce:: with SMTP id d14mr5250071wrp.94.1605712766376; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 07:19:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from normingtong-a01.lan (2.144.199.146.dyn.plus.net. [146.199.144.2]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id v189sm4908399wmg.14.2020.11.18.07.19.25 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 18 Nov 2020 07:19:25 -0800 (PST) From: Glyn Normington Message-Id: <99D35053-27B1-42E5-9292-EF90C7B273B0@gmail.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_5AB53ADA-1BE7-412B-BDDC-B5F1DF18D28E" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\)) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 15:19:24 +0000 In-Reply-To: <1C323D96-6921-490F-92F0-268AEE924F7D@tzi.org> Cc: Marko Mikulicic , jsonpath@ietf.org, Daniel P To: Carsten Bormann References: <1C323D96-6921-490F-92F0-268AEE924F7D@tzi.org> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] About duplicates, and the question thereof X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 15:19:30 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_5AB53ADA-1BE7-412B-BDDC-B5F1DF18D28E Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 On 18 Nov 2020, at 07:57, Carsten Bormann wrote: >=20 > I would expect the spec will leaves implementations some leeway here, = but that should be based on an examination of existing implementations. The example below is instructive. There is no convincing consensus (* - = see the end of this email) among the implementations tested, although = one result is far more popular than the others. Apart from removal or (more typically) not of duplicated nodes the = example also raises the spectre of non-deterministic, since JSON objects = are unordered. It=E2=80=99s a spectre because all the implementations = that manage to produce a result seem to agree on the order in which the = object is traversed by .*, which I find disappointing. = https://cburgmer.github.io/json-path-comparison/results/union_with_repeate= d_matches_after_dot_notation_with_wildcard.html = The example applies the selector $.*[0,:5] to the document: { "a": [ "string", null, true ], "b": [ false, "string", 5.4 ] } The most popular result, given by 11 of the 40 implementations tested, = is: [ "string", "string", null, true, false, false, "string", 5.4 ] Just 4 of the implementations remove duplicate nodes from unions, thus: [ "string", null, true, false, "string", 5.4 ] Only one removes duplicate values, as opposed to nodes, thus: [ "string", null, true, false, 5.4 ] * "The consensus is based on the majority across all supported = implementations. This is achieved by executing a query against all = implementations and finally comparing the results. If a majority of half = of all implementations (rounded up) plus one agree on an outcome we = speak of a consensus. This guarantees difference of at least 2 votes = even in critical cases.=E2=80=9D =E2=80=94 = https://github.com/cburgmer/json-path-comparison/blob/master/FAQ.md --Apple-Mail=_5AB53ADA-1BE7-412B-BDDC-B5F1DF18D28E Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 On = 18 Nov 2020, at 07:57, Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> wrote:

I would = expect the spec will leaves implementations some leeway here, but that = should be based on an examination of existing = implementations.

The = example below is instructive. There is no convincing consensus (* - see = the end of this email) among the implementations tested, although one = result is far more popular than the others.

Apart from removal or (more typically) not of = duplicated nodes the example also raises the spectre of = non-deterministic, since JSON objects are unordered. It=E2=80=99s a = spectre because all the implementations that manage to produce a result = seem to agree on the order in which the object is traversed by .*, which = I find disappointing.

<= br class=3D"">
The example applies the selector $.*[0,:5] to = the document:

{
  "a": [
    "string",
    null,
    true
  ],
  "b": [
    false,
    "string",
    5.4
  ]
}
The most popular result, given by 11 of = the 40 implementations tested, is:

[
  "string",
  "string",
  null,
  true,
  false,
  false,
  "string",
  5.4
]
Just 4 of the implementations remove = duplicate nodes from unions, thus:

[
  "string",
  null,
  true,
  false,
  "string",
  5.4
]
Only one removes duplicate values, as = opposed to nodes, thus:

[
  "string",
  null,
  true,
  false,
  5.4
]
* "The consensus is based on the majority = across all supported implementations. This is achieved by executing a query against all implementations and = finally comparing the results. If a majority of half of all implementations = (rounded up) plus one agree on an outcome we speak of a consensus. This guarantees = difference of at least 2 votes even in critical cases.=E2=80=9D =E2=80=94 https://github.com/cburgmer/json-path-comparison/blob/master/FA= Q.md

= --Apple-Mail=_5AB53ADA-1BE7-412B-BDDC-B5F1DF18D28E-- From nobody Wed Nov 18 08:02:50 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA18D3A0BE2 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 08:02:48 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.097 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CjWeV0uvADWy for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 08:02:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-qk1-x732.google.com (mail-qk1-x732.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::732]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1B9483A0BBC for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 08:02:47 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-qk1-x732.google.com with SMTP id q5so2208904qkc.12 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 08:02:46 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=R+Xeg0x86EAtVVzY4Q22u7C9ooyIlOL2tWTDpqtOCHk=; b=Pl2VbJcGQ19x8apzL/NR3y8wyEi7L6Nj1V1vEGKqNOlcyqe4A6NXJlm7qXB+vyx/5i PzC2L2Xp47kCsZFud/aJw53tDQAE1vka1g9QduYP3ISalPSF5BhkQX6Si7x+PpK9ckVS p7asNU2uzfGNb9FchCGDZHGNA+RWLJPsEaVmbIbs0S3FAmNyq50Y7OmVph5me93ck8tK kgreFGBFoXcZZUwbWC0wCdIR1K4Qtj1vkbk/ZQdAbRyx+kDT4j1oJscKjPe9UOUvZ1QS YT3CsS6K0X68swNNzMV4mgsTRAMRlE9R0PbalKPh2k9Idh1NQ1zNtN2MJ/9SE/m/RlNL r/EA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=R+Xeg0x86EAtVVzY4Q22u7C9ooyIlOL2tWTDpqtOCHk=; b=mYfeUKxjmJspGEhGtMkX+rLJFXVxcKGqSr3Y0MaKQAYnehTNU3UHmADxTssPk9f2Ff 8wO/V4EHhgS4dw8t1dwTUcLvG/6XN/XpUDUsjOi3hvvkxwVJxcRygZ1zE0yy1hBXG9Xi XZufRc9XzQrBD6D7rhslAUzxQZi9JKeWonexu3OY8djS6oh9fDYiuHm78k7Gv+/H3On/ 5B780v1oQpD5MeisO6hHAB4qCNJpJya9wvLBTc4XnFbi+6rGY2BtIPYA+5Srv9+SQN86 GzUKVE5lkkpAebB2SrDffRJoXoDqeJELjqqjhYDW1o4G2aLXtiHNt95znsMMOWWj7yia cmAQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531+97nh6qK0DCZkeawjWYG72frP80qt8DeBGw93gLW/hK49O21t QeYjskDoEok7E5Zwp5SYlR1Z2uJz+O4cFK8ohME= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJx2BhOFqCub+hdusAeOLgniGOiiJoqoHdt7Hwnb+3VIcyGyN5BSqRM+ovEkWwxXIIas3OHeYcqtly4aKHKHbMU= X-Received: by 2002:a37:6697:: with SMTP id a145mr5657960qkc.296.1605715365978; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 08:02:45 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Marko Mikulicic Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 17:02:34 +0100 Message-ID: To: Daniel P Cc: jsonpath@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000ffe5c805b463bd92" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] Jsonpath Digest, Vol 5, Issue 16 X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 16:02:49 -0000 --000000000000ffe5c805b463bd92 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" The mental model that leads to omitting duplicate nodes in the output is "selection": if you take an input array and select nodes with index 0,1 or 0, you get only 2 results (since selecting an index twice has no effect). OTOH, if you opt for a "collect" model, whenever you encounter a node that matches that query you add it to the result stream, thus the same nodes can be present multiple times in the result. I have a slight preference for the "collect" model, because the general case in jsonpath is to collect things that appear at various points in the json tree. For example: {"a": {"b": 1, "c": 2}, "d": 3}, $.a.b yields [1] and not {"a":{"b":1}} (i.e. jsonpath is not a filter and view operation but a pick and gather operation) On Wed, 18 Nov 2020 at 14:59, Daniel P wrote: > > From: Marko Mikulicic > > > It was my impression that we were talking about duplicated nodes not > duplicated values: > > > Okay. Terms are being used in ways that are not clear (to me), hence > my question. > > > Given the array [10,20,30] > > > > $..[0,1,0] > > > > Would yield only two results [10, 20] > > > > (Not that I'm advocating for removing duplicates, personally I think we > shouldn't) > > > > > It's hard to see how a standardized JSONPath could, as my understanding is > that > most legacy implementations do not. > > An exception may be npm jsonpath, https://www.npmjs.com/package/jsonpath. > The > section "Other Minor Differences [from Stefan Goessner's original > implementation]" > includes the text: "unions now yield real unions with no duplicates > rather than concatenated > results". > > In npm jsonpath, given the array [10,20,30,30], $..[0,1,0] yields > > [10,20] > > and $..[1,2,3] yields > > [20,30,30] > > Daniel > > -- > Jsonpath mailing list > Jsonpath@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonpath > --000000000000ffe5c805b463bd92 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
The mental model that leads to omitting duplicate nodes in= the output is "selection": if you take an input array and select= nodes with index 0,1 or 0, you get only 2 results (since selecting an inde= x twice has no effect).

OTOH, if you opt for a "col= lect" model, whenever you encounter a node that matches that query you= add it to the result stream, thus the same nodes can be present multiple t= imes in the result.

I have a slight preference=C2= =A0for the "collect" model, because the general case in jsonpath = is to collect things that appear at various points in the json tree. For ex= ample:

{"a": {"b": 1, "c&= quot;: 2}, "d": 3},=C2=A0 $.a.b yields [1] and not {"a"= :{"b":1}} (i.e. jsonpath is not a filter and view operation but a= pick and gather operation)



On Wed, 18 N= ov 2020 at 14:59, Daniel P <d= anielaparker@gmail.com> wrote:
> From: Marko Mikulicic <mmikulicic@gmail.com>

> It was my impression that we were talking about duplicated nodes not d= uplicated values:
>
Okay. Terms are being used in ways that are not clear (to me), hence
my question.

> Given the array [10,20,30]
>
> $..[0,1,0]
>
> Would yield only two results [10, 20]
>
> (Not that I'm advocating for removing duplicates, personally I thi= nk we shouldn't)
>
>
It's hard to see how a standardized JSONPath could, as my understanding= is that
most legacy implementations do not.

An exception may be npm jsonpath, https://www.npmjs.com/packag= e/jsonpath. The
section "Other Minor Differences [from Stefan Goessner's original<= br> implementation]"
includes the text: "unions now yield real unions with no duplicates rather than concatenated
results".

In npm jsonpath, given the array [10,20,30,30], $..[0,1,0] yields

[10,20]

and $..[1,2,3] yields

[20,30,30]

Daniel

--
Jsonpath mailing list
Jsonpath@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonpath
--000000000000ffe5c805b463bd92-- From nobody Wed Nov 18 08:35:41 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B87113A0C77 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 08:35:39 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8u959nz-1hFi for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 08:35:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wm1-x32d.google.com (mail-wm1-x32d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::32d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1B2A93A0C6A for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 08:35:38 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wm1-x32d.google.com with SMTP id h21so3302581wmb.2 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 08:35:38 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=cvKzjUH6EXU322v8nEhixFCRxG/Ppbf75M5yy8/VV2E=; b=BcCPPEMSJcxHMfTY/DrpbQs5mjrR95oP3tdVu///GvqWtLEqCE1CbqVdMO9EWSI6vH K7E62rNBtG/jGQVSfTKqleSWiZaD2LsONcEt6RNRZUN/Z7/UD/c+OwqfeWBvAmiN8ODe gxrgMs1OieUQ5c+nJ0lF77KjgyrrsPZyqy1u49qmwIfjxQVIf9Ox0kYtoTF0PonCv4/i sI3lhz6OXZkRhBlM/r5EqIrQT842eyaVTtRFor2v45PxnWeiSwt8JYBuwgIeaXa+itu+ FZicxszPeQ7QJXbXNfcQNt85rQ80F8gLPm+bt6NNvxPjmSQOmBe7BxWv6xuJYTAGwUkY xgmA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=cvKzjUH6EXU322v8nEhixFCRxG/Ppbf75M5yy8/VV2E=; b=jRCeK8Y2vhzJb8Myg1ImBQAGSwPc0HzLzXx4nnpdLkGQ/11zjKhhHL4vOTjitzd6KI tdmEi6MwIe4H36sXVXkzZj7UK7yjj1r00r0ob36jW8b3JrXgmPFEbZ0A+FBL2Rn2gF+d GIHvYyBRhYxgz+tZwbQnGtbhUoYpn6zjWz/olLvsoY9EBXkRUnd5y3wmmDvTcGI6RI6L URGcz5Ydmze39aIfv0aZP/JQbMSSilJBSqh8GoxzswXyAlwj00ND9fAgCCHE7pChCeWf n+Yot11k8FxOK9wHEflGF63aBUD9B5xh8EdJPLUg6EEc78ZcmTE6C+JctC8UOqTCBLrr rrfg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530JI9Dj9K2QvvFgH6Wo8z+vN/5DOgaCg9hpJTVeb+WVWKsQM2CN 1VBZhZcryLACp1WQ6oh5XKtuj32TIhqbhlYd5ghD2LFa4JY= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzEqPgkGY522Z2b0gYzjePQArwZB1s7kppiMBCiWiJlE7KiUo1OMV5JqUYIuxYpYCJiZ81OIjZXHKhbYxnj3po= X-Received: by 2002:a7b:c458:: with SMTP id l24mr879320wmi.136.1605717336256; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 08:35:36 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Daniel P Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 11:35:24 -0500 Message-ID: To: jsonpath@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: Subject: [Jsonpath] On duplicates, and the consensus therewith X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 16:35:40 -0000 > From: Glyn Normington > > The example below is instructive. There is no convincing consensus (* - s= ee the end of this email) among the implementations tested, although one re= sult is far more popular than the others. > > Apart from removal or (more typically) not of duplicated nodes the exampl= e also raises the spectre of non-deterministic, since JSON objects are unor= dered. It=E2=80=99s a spectre because all the implementations that manage t= o produce a result seem to agree on the order in which the object is traver= sed by .*, which I find disappointing. > > https://cburgmer.github.io/json-path-comparison/results/union_with_repeat= ed_matches_after_dot_notation_with_wildcard.html > > The example applies the selector $.*[0,:5] to the document: > > { > "a": [ > "string", > null, > true > ], > "b": [ > false, > "string", > 5.4 > ] > } > > The most popular result, given by 11 of the 40 implementations tested, is= : > > [ > > "string", > "string", > null, > true, > false, > false, > "string", > 5.4 > ] > This result (11 of 40) isn't necessarily representative, as many of the implementations are failing on the slice component ":5". Maybe we can get Christoph Burgmer to add some simpler tests that cover duplicates, if he hasn't already done so. > Just 4 of the implementations remove duplicate nodes from unions, thus: > > [ > "string", > null, > true, > false, > "string", > 5.4 > ] > > Only one removes duplicate values, as opposed to nodes, thus: > > [ > "string", > null, > true, > false, > 5.4 > ] > And the author of that one is starting to think that's a defect. Daniel From nobody Wed Nov 18 08:50:10 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7D633A097A for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 08:50:08 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hiT7pxNwD0Dz for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 08:50:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wm1-x336.google.com (mail-wm1-x336.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::336]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C92A03A0C82 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 08:50:06 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wm1-x336.google.com with SMTP id h21so3346108wmb.2 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 08:50:06 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=tg85b0PWITaFUf2wU55ugzfpBrR5QoeRWv8q6WM8HJk=; b=b/nPblrj3uGctamRWDbciyD+rHT4qpAACDpDJR2+2CfTLjKX7uFCCar48ZheNctyOt grDl2s5q/bOsCgpUyYT6fTrI1v3E6ijR05NwUxh6j5AbyNI3n7aNYKiZL3igv/vRcoq+ jdDZT8kz4Plo/OZn0G7BXvWqiQeFc06jxjQTxzIb9gBd6qhCJjGKB2i/hKbmmwDUqW9Z o/b8fwjHS+RPcMo+LocK2rjaNJw0goeQ7Gi4iFbveeRjaqxUYHuPUA986wiB5oxAN+h6 3+9RfOEXnZqef2yzlSVLXJ8Rqf7Va9YXSIhDe5JZpdbpsQDOB7jkT5wX2GJQGjtQgMMs 3hJg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=tg85b0PWITaFUf2wU55ugzfpBrR5QoeRWv8q6WM8HJk=; b=o73J5SWghYCUDghFriyqiBkZsObLQ2PhSG4PtEY2GPhGbjEbWWJztlpJNA9kZQpy+1 aCpfyWH4oHWyiAdPA7t4dfpC8UFmU68/9GzG4tBz2GlCGxioy60RnMstlDxZ+fwZ4V2q kkZh5SehYvNg/v3a3CYKbUQyhk3bfcmyt6m00WmWsQsQq8gKWu9xVupu4hgA9Gn3CFgl D3OxwUdwr8XzpnoPKh854hjFx6PGiamCzbMvEc2PJ0bdkiNHUCAlYFC4qOlVMMsCQCYi PAZvNgDdTw6axgvUsZGowhmf8tQg9SP0nei21ZLQ9ZSiT0GMpCTiHqyPnlCULQVyF/Zt +o/A== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531yNy/A7drYaom0s0jvzfk3MX8XLxTUeNn3Ro97hN2N3DUqE7OQ faOvslcottMb3PTggsPDw2c= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJye7yV/uC+FwC2rbatnv22anQWPDkprrVMZwuAENTGtrceHowHai31zhMNazfD9fDPNce3GlQ== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:7413:: with SMTP id p19mr1083wmc.44.1605718205171; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 08:50:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from normingtong-a01.lan (2.144.199.146.dyn.plus.net. [146.199.144.2]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id c6sm36998933wrh.74.2020.11.18.08.50.03 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 18 Nov 2020 08:50:04 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\)) From: Glyn Normington In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 16:50:03 +0000 Cc: jsonpath@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <8BB5BFBF-0673-40AC-8799-A715B43CF169@gmail.com> References: To: Daniel P X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] On duplicates, and the consensus therewith X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 16:50:09 -0000 On 18 Nov 2020, at 16:35, Daniel P wrote: >=20 >> From: Glyn Normington >>=20 >> The example below is instructive. There is no convincing consensus (* = - see the end of this email) among the implementations tested, although = one result is far more popular than the others. >>=20 >> Apart from removal or (more typically) not of duplicated nodes the = example also raises the spectre of non-deterministic, since JSON objects = are unordered. It=E2=80=99s a spectre because all the implementations = that manage to produce a result seem to agree on the order in which the = object is traversed by .*, which I find disappointing. >>=20 >> = https://cburgmer.github.io/json-path-comparison/results/union_with_repeate= d_matches_after_dot_notation_with_wildcard.html >>=20 >> The example applies the selector $.*[0,:5] to the document: >>=20 >> { >> "a": [ >> "string", >> null, >> true >> ], >> "b": [ >> false, >> "string", >> 5.4 >> ] >> } >>=20 >> The most popular result, given by 11 of the 40 implementations = tested, is: >>=20 >> [ >>=20 >> "string", >> "string", >> null, >> true, >> false, >> false, >> "string", >> 5.4 >> ] >>=20 >=20 > This result (11 of 40) isn't necessarily representative, as many of > the implementations are failing on the slice component ":5". Maybe we > can get Christoph Burgmer to add some simpler tests that cover > duplicates, if he hasn't already done so. Christoph is responsive to PRs, so we can add our own examples if we can = come up with them. Would [0,0] applied to [=E2=80=9Ca=E2=80=9D] be = sufficient for starters? Can you think of other distinct cases? >=20 >> Just 4 of the implementations remove duplicate nodes from unions, = thus: >>=20 >> [ >> "string", >> null, >> true, >> false, >> "string", >> 5.4 >> ] >>=20 >> Only one removes duplicate values, as opposed to nodes, thus: >>=20 >> [ >> "string", >> null, >> true, >> false, >> 5.4 >> ] >>=20 >=20 > And the author of that one is starting to think that's a defect. Nice! >=20 > Daniel >=20 > --=20 > Jsonpath mailing list > Jsonpath@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonpath From nobody Wed Nov 18 09:02:06 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10B053A0CBC for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 09:02:05 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.099 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fBd4jJVkVhgO for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 09:02:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wr1-x42f.google.com (mail-wr1-x42f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::42f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9E7353A0CBE for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 09:02:03 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wr1-x42f.google.com with SMTP id u12so2980752wrt.0 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 09:02:03 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=sFoc3U1kgT0fgovD/cfgwdMwvwliJCeaz/Oq4nsw2zk=; b=TCFiJVQu3x70Yt94Z5NDQXX+UkeEKwbJMRwv/rx1LucVnb9TrmdznO6+LCWwlJjPfw ygIHJjVXrxGILoPkq4RYjGJWlwDxPMGWF1jPb7tOQdGZJcK02+ye6yD6v954zw52A8kS 7cgeTzjQ0hMdR6IOwORM3BBHdFKq0ZgA7NAfBT+5feU+XLLr5EdZdGJzYmihfqtRXvIJ j2R1p/nYLhn425Zb+OfgorpsmPr59dttqAvnQBoRsohI2bW67pfO42QgoFsDug40ou73 OiuRDGjb0fuiI5VUbbLuHySxeKPLPZoJkmCC58BCB6JUu4NJFWY6m5644Bzv6g7xCwC0 bYmw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=sFoc3U1kgT0fgovD/cfgwdMwvwliJCeaz/Oq4nsw2zk=; b=L/LlJ8enZY3UrHA+r4ClPWWeLxlJzEq6B9geElAgrQg1iY/UOfWtvDFqW449qyAjqm ZJFKdg/+cEbxSz41EDYiJrBx0og1lbwxR5B25z0EmDNgAXPCF883uEiGymWn9naTU1Db BNmWzJXpitIaI8mTr6rmmm6xZG/bfoICFOtXQxkzNMiQ0xjsQ6+5MQs5oM4AuXr+pHGD fK/SrwXJJ+vkgSikuzwaK5Fj1F2nCsdBHLoP4lN+RUP1Q2BZGoEweiqht3Wx9NAv17Rr gmWgqfYHSlF3DWgNGthKFm+9WiZFkhIzeo6T6t5W9zjFQtM6Ngxud7D4x8/ly3THcZ07 WUgw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530w6lP2QWQOrAA1ebxuMAUdJ0gDztBD+IcHvatYPWQ3LYWKN9Hy T69h/0RA4Ux/zlvdowkxBNx6sIeMy63dUWiGob8= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJz6BeoG2eT68jAZ/u8iUkWMfhWix/eeYmZbvr1afhWT2hWUG9UzXxC496C4QMINOj43cVVUWTlzLOHnNLSocHQ= X-Received: by 2002:adf:814f:: with SMTP id 73mr5695313wrm.174.1605718922056; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 09:02:02 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <8BB5BFBF-0673-40AC-8799-A715B43CF169@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <8BB5BFBF-0673-40AC-8799-A715B43CF169@gmail.com> From: Daniel P Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 12:01:50 -0500 Message-ID: To: Glyn Normington Cc: jsonpath@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] On duplicates, and the consensus therewith X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 17:02:05 -0000 On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 11:50 AM Glyn Normington wrote: > > Christoph is responsive to PRs, so we can add our own examples if we can = come up with them. Would [0,0] applied to [=E2=80=9Ca=E2=80=9D] be sufficie= nt for starters? Can you think of other distinct cases? > Perhaps that and "$..['a','a']" applied to {"a" : 1} Daniel From nobody Wed Nov 18 11:43:44 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC9173A0B04 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 11:43:43 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.099 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iZIEufTmVHDa for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 11:43:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wr1-x433.google.com (mail-wr1-x433.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::433]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C58043A0AF5 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 11:43:41 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wr1-x433.google.com with SMTP id o15so3382147wru.6 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 11:43:41 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=qHvbCOnS0yRBqJjpyTfbgH3JFcGlp/1z8puikebEdZY=; b=NtIra0MEY7EsKmIC5jW7NDCR/ZUQ6LFxS52YvdOyVxiBn7e0GzAR7+hW/LNBl4PEut MJ299W0nNs2+ft3f1mbdvJRGeurIDQTJUa1ALouPm6gsWVytOdggE1wCi+chHELen5bW P5ELpLcujU+tus5484QEi/oxt4Gupbg2P/7OY1SbpezO2b5wsgP8xgcKnBOncLs8GFVE iVu1JyurU756JJvniQM7+ftaPXjut7pWozJyy6qB1BTXunX5Z1+mYHUjGmGS+HJi/gPg KgEtRDwmYPpjc5a2r42qYrVWQjQTRoXnlgkmQYPfBO8KVLDtIb4ZfPW8tGz9QsvjvEJX cK9g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=qHvbCOnS0yRBqJjpyTfbgH3JFcGlp/1z8puikebEdZY=; b=h83XSUNB0H5OUimIoE2qQvxuT5fGSgQEoDKXsWcA16adWfbzhAIflrECBEB5LDwEoK FsAkDxih2+p/s8C0z6hDrUjfYGtseKiaIOhZzVIhoFyC4hNh0qM5XGO49jzJc6aS8MQW ZO8KTIByAyA3ulb6Ym8Hcf6aGK7aiPmfGS83sGSrABqVJ/W0jDYgbdy8KlndlZFwPjvY 8pnPszVKUhOrPYTlTZjJnlT4GfN983+F56jhZgaAUgbRlewVMom7zvSH1KB15thN5kp2 jfgCxcwE6e/wMc2AYBSpy8j4vtsJPQr43CtawA5pqnVyumVIH1456jLVT96pajRej3m+ MwPg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532rURXiTxbnoOhnKcbtKkO5LVAS4d0cn34jenQd70KTowfk5l9f zCy1KR9HPZNGZ4tgPGWNev0= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyQRtX5FwdTniaw9q4qc1D7GgL79dU5KJQik+0SpD128uNjwItSKVzajSWMqlv+Is0yPv48SQ== X-Received: by 2002:adf:fcc8:: with SMTP id f8mr6443917wrs.331.1605728620278; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 11:43:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from normingtong-a01.lan (2.144.199.146.dyn.plus.net. [146.199.144.2]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id u85sm5578905wmu.43.2020.11.18.11.43.39 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 18 Nov 2020 11:43:39 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\)) From: Glyn Normington In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 19:43:39 +0000 Cc: jsonpath@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <8BB5BFBF-0673-40AC-8799-A715B43CF169@gmail.com> To: Daniel P X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] On duplicates, and the consensus therewith X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 19:43:44 -0000 On 18 Nov 2020, at 17:01, Daniel P wrote: >=20 > On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 11:50 AM Glyn Normington > wrote: >>=20 >> Christoph is responsive to PRs, so we can add our own examples if we = can come up with them. Would [0,0] applied to [=E2=80=9Ca=E2=80=9D] be = sufficient for starters? Can you think of other distinct cases? >>=20 > Perhaps that and "$..['a','a']" applied to {"a" : 1} Is the =E2=80=9C..=E2=80=9D essential? Not sure what it adds. >=20 > Daniel From nobody Wed Nov 18 12:06:49 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 611B63A0B5C for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 12:06:47 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.898 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id beHJIDz06bzj for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 12:06:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 150A83A0858 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 12:06:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.217.120] (p548dcb31.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.141.203.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4Cbv363HM6zyS2; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 21:06:42 +0100 (CET) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\)) From: Carsten Bormann In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 21:06:42 +0100 Cc: Daniel P , jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 627422801.9880739-50f6a7b3eaa510f5addeb05b34521efe Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <788D6718-4A3F-424B-964A-2BB6FE8A20EA@tzi.org> References: To: Marko Mikulicic X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] Jsonpath Digest, Vol 5, Issue 16 X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 20:06:47 -0000 > On 2020-11-18, at 17:02, Marko Mikulicic wrote: >=20 > {"a": {"b": 1, "c": 2}, "d": 3}, $.a.b yields [1] and not = {"a":{"b":1}} (i.e. jsonpath is not a filter and view operation but a = pick and gather operation) Actually it yields /a/b (in RFC 6901 format) or $.a.b (in JSONpath = format). (Which of these is true depends on the output format, which is kind of = unrelated to the query model.) Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten From nobody Wed Nov 18 12:11:16 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15CED3A0B6B for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 12:11:15 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.898 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id LtIi1R8was1f for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 12:11:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E69F13A0B6E for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 12:11:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.217.120] (p548dcb31.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.141.203.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4Cbv8968LtzyVg; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 21:11:05 +0100 (CET) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\)) From: Carsten Bormann In-Reply-To: <99D35053-27B1-42E5-9292-EF90C7B273B0@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 21:11:05 +0100 Cc: jsonpath@ietf.org, Marko Mikulicic , Daniel P X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 627423065.413656-cb1e4fc3a20ebedd558db3d98cb9ca46 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <1C323D96-6921-490F-92F0-268AEE924F7D@tzi.org> <99D35053-27B1-42E5-9292-EF90C7B273B0@gmail.com> To: Glyn Normington X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] About duplicates, and the question thereof X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 20:11:15 -0000 On 2020-11-18, at 16:19, Glyn Normington = wrote: >=20 > If a majority of half of all implementations (rounded up) plus one = agree on an outcome we speak of a consensus.=20 That is a rather rough consensus (we don=E2=80=99t vote in the IETF = anyway). But it is indeed strong guidance. It has the flaw that it isn=E2=80=99t weighted (and that would be very = hard to add in an agreeable way), and it is subject to vote stuffing (I = can write ten more implementations in a week), so that kind of guidance = should always taken with a grain of salt. But it sure helps! Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten From nobody Wed Nov 18 15:28:35 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87CE83A0E60 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 15:28:33 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.097 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dpOH_T01LdGf for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 15:28:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-qk1-x735.google.com (mail-qk1-x735.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::735]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9C7263A0E5A for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 15:28:30 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-qk1-x735.google.com with SMTP id y197so3676297qkb.7 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 15:28:30 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=6dwLbgiHD8W569PpD/cbgu7LhUWJFnRv5VU3EpuzXxI=; b=i0zb3cIMqJimSwCTX/Biu+Cl++ghX5yqYaejTVP+/V7WXRe4Up4WnWwHUPKZVRQYiB Q0xzpALjv7HBPDVlLZ47pKxUBPQXghUl0+EFNc4p89VTQLSW4QIw1/SEiJHhH9YoQTBY /DxYGeAttGHomUy3a2AaKdn/1VXCulVYFaLE8zS0jMbX6LHTt4tXPmRpUAL8NRpyvt36 +Xlw1caXnZSd1BfEKlI3R79A+cTKM74tFxRumNUVZkzJIvLX3LthCAB1cIv3xTYYfbv+ M95S9YglV2DUa2auRAWUXraLNoIqp0C9NI+toQi3d0GB8dT0/MmSCJ4PpuXsY2a5qqV1 /gkg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=6dwLbgiHD8W569PpD/cbgu7LhUWJFnRv5VU3EpuzXxI=; b=brKnj1okppZyioadlD1hEEshL287879LrEuwZi/fYNHqy/xTYPI4V/Ul1nCQNwB+nI dLwklFYBy/easuBcrarySVkUKZwcuQOFi19Rf/7uSPUx7QTppk+ni+QwTdhKKTejs6sT iD/QFRUG8aO1/S+9hruyN0mjP3KlRjzIJfogGxuRXiTxYM3ZztSwVEKj7o6sy1f1XNMh jOBfno50AHggw2H4Nw9ozDBzgqlJIJLbtosgqUrV+PaSF9tHQseU5Msx2kBjRQDhUKXB 91Opb1lJ6X/rW2vBONKaHOsrH4Mt3by4Kc3taU1JNZUtVHSbnX86UwJQ3NjUnypDc8AR wXMQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532B4M0iTdKu0qpWdQTdeagv+a4/7Jfin2Be75KdPEqCrFjykhMK 6WjNwoPVvnE3GMbGvRY2/2YlsZB6I5afootVK7jdHiYA4ag= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzcvnSqpCH+VMujCOg3a22CAWrLcgWDFYvOpYgSAR8cFVX0lCYgm/SwPGAsSJp1YsozFCelGoM5VErqaazzAu8= X-Received: by 2002:a37:6697:: with SMTP id a145mr8010946qkc.296.1605742099501; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 15:28:19 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <788D6718-4A3F-424B-964A-2BB6FE8A20EA@tzi.org> In-Reply-To: <788D6718-4A3F-424B-964A-2BB6FE8A20EA@tzi.org> From: Marko Mikulicic Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 00:28:07 +0100 Message-ID: To: Carsten Bormann Cc: Daniel P , jsonpath@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000071161805b469f765" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] Jsonpath Digest, Vol 5, Issue 16 X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 23:28:34 -0000 --00000000000071161805b469f765 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Ah nice, thanks. (I'm just trying to understand, I don't have strong opinions) If I understand correctly the idea is to conceptually split the effective evaluation in two parts: 1. Produce an array/set of "selected paths" 2. (Optionally) resolve the resulting paths into their pointed values. Of these two, only the first one is relevant to query model. The second part however is relevant to discussions around effective use cases (e.g. whether we must allow implementations to fuse (1) and (2) and to directly yield values) Let's focus on the query model: We still have the choice of how to model the results: it can be ordered or unordered, it can contain unique paths or allow duplicate paths. Furthermore the order can be: * fully non-deterministic * partially determined by input (e.g. array order preserved, but paths derived from object fields unordered) * fully determined by input (e.g. using a canonical ordering of field names in objects; as commonly done when signing jsons) * or fully determined by output (e.g. sorting all the resulting paths) It's not clear to me how would we navigate this choice. One one hand we have user expectations (based in use cases, end-to-end experience, ...). On the other we have implementations concerns (e.g. avoid sorting, avoid extra data structures to dedup). Ah, and we also have to attempt minimizing the disruption of tons of existing implementations. Do we even have to make a choice? Could we limit the scope of the query model to just define which elements are selected and leave the definition on how the selection is conveyed to the consumer to another specification layer? I'm not talking about complete freedom to implementations. Perhaps we could define a few standard resultset types. Implementations could implement one or more of them, but must advertise which one(s) it implements. WDYT? Cheers, Marko On Wed, Nov 18, 2020, 21:06 Carsten Bormann wrote: > > > > On 2020-11-18, at 17:02, Marko Mikulicic wrote: > > > > {"a": {"b": 1, "c": 2}, "d": 3}, $.a.b yields [1] and not {"a":{"b":1}= } > (i.e. jsonpath is not a filter and view operation but a pick and gather > operation) > > Actually it yields /a/b (in RFC 6901 format) or $.a.b (in JSONpath format= ). > > (Which of these is true depends on the output format, which is kind of > unrelated to the query model.) > > Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten > > --00000000000071161805b469f765 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Ah nice, thanks.

(I'm just trying to understand, I don't have strong= opinions)

If I understa= nd correctly the idea is to conceptually split the effective evaluation in = two parts:

1. Produce an= array/set of "selected paths"
2. (Optiona= lly) resolve the resulting paths into their pointed values.

Of these two, only the first one is r= elevant to query model.

= The second part however is relevant to discussions around effective use cas= es (e.g. whether we must allow implementations to fuse (1) and (2) and to d= irectly yield values)

Let&= #39;s focus on the query model:

We still have the choice of how to model the results: it can be o= rdered or unordered, it can contain unique paths or allow duplicate paths.= =C2=A0

Furthermore the o= rder can be:

* fully non= -deterministic
* partially determined by input (e.g.= array order preserved, but paths derived from object fields unordered)
* fully determined by input (e.g. using a canonical ord= ering of field names in objects; as commonly done when signing jsons)
=
* or fully determined by output (e.g. sorting all the res= ulting paths)

It's n= ot clear to me how would we navigate this choice.
One one hand we have user expectations (based in = use cases, end-to-end experience, ...).
On the other= we have implementations concerns (e.g. avoid sorting, avoid extra data str= uctures to dedup).
Ah, and we also have to attempt m= inimizing the disruption of tons of existing implementations.

Do we even have to make a choice?

Could we limit the scope of= the query model to just define which elements are selected and leave the d= efinition on how the selection is conveyed to the consumer to another speci= fication layer?

I'm = not talking about complete freedom to implementations. Perhaps we could def= ine a few standard resultset types. Implementations could implement one or = more of them, but must advertise which one(s) it implements.

WDYT?

Cheers,
Marko

On Wed= , Nov 18, 2020, 21:06 Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org&= gt; wrote:


> On 2020-11-18, at 17:02, Marko Mikulicic <mmikulicic@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> {"a": {"b": 1, "c": 2}, "d": 3= },=C2=A0 $.a.b yields [1] and not {"a":{"b":1}} (i.e. j= sonpath is not a filter and view operation but a pick and gather operation)=

Actually it yields /a/b (in RFC 6901 format) or $.a.b (in JSONpath format).=

(Which of these is true depends on the output format, which is kind of unre= lated to the query model.)

Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten

--00000000000071161805b469f765-- From nobody Wed Nov 18 15:34:26 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D5F33A0E8F for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 15:34:24 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.898 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ksf3u1LMgfCe for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 15:34:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B85F93A0E91 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 15:34:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.217.118] (p548dcb31.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.141.203.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4Cbzff5GzdzyVg; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 00:34:18 +0100 (CET) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\)) From: Carsten Bormann In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 00:34:18 +0100 Cc: Daniel P , jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 627435258.223493-a60fb1257ac0cbed62562a5e71f0e55b Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <22A078CE-C760-4EBA-88C1-47A741552D85@tzi.org> References: <788D6718-4A3F-424B-964A-2BB6FE8A20EA@tzi.org> To: Marko Mikulicic X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] Jsonpath Digest, Vol 5, Issue 16 X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 23:34:24 -0000 On 2020-11-19, at 00:28, Marko Mikulicic wrote: >=20 > Do we even have to make a choice? If we can achieve not having to make a choice, this approach would = definitely be worth it. > I'm not talking about complete freedom to implementations. Perhaps we = could define a few standard resultset types. Implementations could = implement one or more of them, but must advertise which one(s) it = implements. If we can achieve pushing (most of) the variability into the output = processing model, we have a big win. Now back to the hundreds of test cases and seeing if this works with = (the majority of) current implementations. Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten From nobody Wed Nov 18 18:03:36 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 72B633A0659 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 18:03:34 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZZaacg4PVwH8 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 18:03:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wr1-x42c.google.com (mail-wr1-x42c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::42c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0EEB63A0408 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 18:03:32 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wr1-x42c.google.com with SMTP id b6so4847034wrt.4 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 18:03:32 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=tTxP6i6v6hx/3FXqdy/ms3X65CNmTIQgShA4p+lhWa0=; b=Wt4eapTQ+ZL4kn/1kiLR8yzD+TkQAoZQRX0z+bEna4uSMEcP3+4AYLMgfttTbvY/Xa Hjn2B0eO+L2r14x+LmFG7SBBKVLoaStmicQcnatd1O+vGIZdjQTz/dX2xYm68DLeSFCR CVWGuTXrsycvpLr1PGls+iBlECXdQXqmSJxhwCOal4bJHasa+PMM8Q742xJHIwpcBZnd /Uc5/7AWPrLU/LzsUQRwmUxLF9n4xJtTT7F3Mp2LQ0qz5POV5cviiZEJKPGR7+6cnKA7 CVGBa1WTm1q0fEd1HaCdZCuAgWs99RQK/pvMvsxZt8QVwQXKo+SGZK2FtVY9dcfFDyGs 78WQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=tTxP6i6v6hx/3FXqdy/ms3X65CNmTIQgShA4p+lhWa0=; b=sjNoXXkovkhAto631ZdUG6w48pl84gWmEmp81Lw+cjzXflopcGsAqeElSoyT/sUWHk iAYKRa2OKTSprvFjkicSucsWpjOEQlpdAIkuzxxNfGWt7eyxYUE9bW2WaZj12HXlKMhT eqdO1dDm338UAy/m6sBLxTf7Fm2s5afVh8Buv8/Jb27SgfJeF2kGlkyo3rNJE44ipmfY fxiHackvLv/Yij9M4wyBhRkVzT9XbJTwLlEDn76/IWaxE7eVBwGkzYg9vJ99hl5fCVJ4 7YpfQk5DYjbYxuUOYD3OtmitoBe86KNZLxgiWdgyy1uz8l7FrPhQUDY2e3uEVYwF/RfS oCpg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530pToxCMRR2BVUZ4noQzroEmz+9Dt4676LlEOIrPd953dfEOiZR NIRW0xY3sZ7FJelR0ITEqxDOtPl/ThVnylkq8k/+YrN5bWWT9Q== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJz/1lxJc/MzaTC6WATxCal1gw080Ewdb4XBHJLNOgs2oPmDchMuk44c8LbbO+Rtc8opA0MnIpYpfTEMV7oXKuY= X-Received: by 2002:a5d:44cf:: with SMTP id z15mr7400126wrr.353.1605751410763; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 18:03:30 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Daniel P Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 21:03:18 -0500 Message-ID: To: jsonpath@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] Node sets, and the meaning thereof X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 02:03:34 -0000 > From: Daniel P > From: Michael Kay > > Assuming a "node set" is a collection of nodes, what do you mean by > "node"? Is it analogous to the use of "Element Node" in the XQuery and > XPath Data Model as described in > https://www.w3.org/TR/xpath-datamodel-31/#ElementNode? > > Indeed, I've been struggling with the same question (not just in the context of JsonPath, but also in devising primitives to assist with manipulation of JSON in XPath and XSLT). > > I think the key difficulty is whether each (key, value) pair in an object is "a thing" that can be identified and manipulated and potentially returned. (If we're talking analogies, then it's analogous to an attribute node in the XDM model). > It's an interesting question. I don't know of any JSON query language, including JSONPath and JMESPath (https://jmespath.org/specification.html), that supports the idea of selecting a sequence of (key,value) pairs. Daniel From nobody Thu Nov 19 08:23:22 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B4953A0811 for ; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 08:23:21 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wMhZaZcrSj0Z for ; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 08:23:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wr1-x42d.google.com (mail-wr1-x42d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::42d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DED1F3A07F9 for ; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 08:23:19 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wr1-x42d.google.com with SMTP id p1so7006757wrf.12 for ; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 08:23:19 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=IMlarz7hbLzQUEbq3P9EPOJRuENnRcfMn8rR8ESVjBw=; b=mD4le7OHWN1+AMq1RYvCpW1Ei+48xvQQhA/4eeAZlFAy8iLnmIvpN9uK6UWGoT2RgP ssjbBGjYj9zX3ByUCyRblOKZWenyvJZ5epbwp7hMb+IyBzkHT6JCQQX0W0E9bC/4je0g aGiM3LcUL/ahTbTaI3ginKMqzhBOpvft7KRxJJNp/66K463jgK4/oOnBoz6M/ozsm+7X r0i2JKKMPhgApa5mNUFLjGpAZ8h8c4DZKVqgGpXxTgpP4sWycBblAIkZ/5zVm4CAzQ2B T6vDzDNf1K+rXWP365ufnI41c8LHmFRSa47Suj9FqBFbGSdrcRUEBU+ceTNdg5OHygTE FhWg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=IMlarz7hbLzQUEbq3P9EPOJRuENnRcfMn8rR8ESVjBw=; b=YE0B8E1d+MSQokOUaotHnethJ+UBhNE7tem5NG6B4p3Z0PvUYXkHIkDJdWdF18t2z4 angXkDRPF3oeWNtv5a0GyapOLrlE5ShO5itLWRkCycDPwkuSJbhOKR3YUj5rOj0U6ss2 0fcUvbIUZ4xAVfT9Za4qid4MiXDGOeHaD4Z68myw9ZVZVmNWse3NpHeSXq4sCZ9IYpSd isWt6kuRY8l4XVRQXhSqfpnSfCFXHe9hq4yuqYgl3qIIlGfbtwCEhYsUxqE8xM01Jzrv hT//DxoWpdwkfFG92jCOqIxuHyzACQIgiL9BZ8Vw0Mi2Jp8K4ik7+40ZYchDhWr00jTu LC9g== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531nkHx5pFUDC2pNVbbKPS6C4xVnlliMat/JEqpu63sCLCjqpVrU oUfMWe0AgtV9wadjahEZObLRHs8dM933Pg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzaRRZtvx1gOcbNIdyInEGJvXsNpXg49BnKO9vXzXsUeicwKnsRKwK3vhwJjRuS9KgKYRvaZQ== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:614e:: with SMTP id y14mr11888683wrt.25.1605802998336; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 08:23:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from normingtong-a01.lan (2.144.199.146.dyn.plus.net. [146.199.144.2]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b14sm410379wrq.47.2020.11.19.08.23.17 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 19 Nov 2020 08:23:17 -0800 (PST) From: Glyn Normington Message-Id: <99680A94-9C7B-4C1C-A98E-BABEDC985EBC@gmail.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_996F925F-FDAD-40C8-808B-3EFD8EFB47DA" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\)) Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 16:23:16 +0000 In-Reply-To: Cc: jsonpath@ietf.org To: Daniel P References: <8BB5BFBF-0673-40AC-8799-A715B43CF169@gmail.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] On duplicates, and the consensus therewith X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 16:23:21 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_996F925F-FDAD-40C8-808B-3EFD8EFB47DA Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 On 18 Nov 2020, at 19:43, Glyn Normington = wrote: >=20 > On 18 Nov 2020, at 17:01, Daniel P wrote: >>=20 >> On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 11:50 AM Glyn Normington >> wrote: >>>=20 >>> Christoph is responsive to PRs, so we can add our own examples if we = can come up with them. Would [0,0] applied to [=E2=80=9Ca=E2=80=9D] be = sufficient for starters? Can you think of other distinct cases? >>>=20 >> Perhaps that and "$..['a','a']" applied to {"a" : 1} >=20 > Is the =E2=80=9C..=E2=80=9D essential? Not sure what it adds. >=20 >>=20 >> Daniel >=20 I ran the two queries through the JSONPath comparison suite, which = compares the behaviour of 40 implementations: $[0,0] applied to ["a=E2=80=9D] gave the result ["a", "a=E2=80=9D] in 27 = cases and ["a=E2=80=9D] or =E2=80=9Ca=E2=80=9D In 8 cases, so there is a = clear consensus there. $['a','a=E2=80=99] applied to {"a":1} gave [1, 1] in 9 cases and 3 cases = with many implementations giving errors. See https://gist.github.com/glyn/cfc750d65ee32f5354013cea9ce7475e = for the = two runs. I also tried to add these to the comparison matrix, but I=E2=80=99ve = failed to get a clean build so far. See = https://github.com/cburgmer/json-path-comparison/pull/76 = .= --Apple-Mail=_996F925F-FDAD-40C8-808B-3EFD8EFB47DA Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 On = 18 Nov 2020, at 19:43, Glyn Normington <glyn.normington.work@gmail.com> wrote:

On = 18 Nov 2020, at 17:01, Daniel P <danielaparker@gmail.com> wrote:

On Wed, = Nov 18, 2020 at 11:50 AM Glyn Normington
<glyn.normington.work@gmail.com> wrote:

Christoph = is responsive to PRs, so we can add our own examples if we can come up = with them. Would [0,0] applied to [=E2=80=9Ca=E2=80=9D] be sufficient = for starters? Can you think of other distinct cases?

Perhaps that and "$..['a','a']" applied to {"a" = : 1}

Is the =E2=80=9C..=E2=80=9D= essential? Not sure what it adds.


Daniel


I ran the two queries through the JSONPath = comparison suite, which compares the behaviour of 40 = implementations:

$[0,0] applied to ["a=E2=80=9D] gave the = result ["a", "a=E2=80=9D] in 27 cases and ["a=E2=80=9D] or = =E2=80=9Ca=E2=80=9D In 8 cases, so there is a clear consensus = there.

$['a','a=E2=80=99] applied to {"a":1} gave [1, 1] = in 9 cases and 3 cases with many implementations giving = errors.

See https://gist.github.com/glyn/cfc750d65ee32f5354013cea9ce7475e for the two runs.

I also tried to add these to the comparison matrix, but = I=E2=80=99ve failed to get a clean build so far. See https://github.com/cburgmer/json-path-comparison/pull/76.= --Apple-Mail=_996F925F-FDAD-40C8-808B-3EFD8EFB47DA-- From nobody Thu Nov 19 10:11:43 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A284C3A0EFB for ; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 10:11:41 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Sd4Rg06omuAP for ; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 10:11:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wm1-x32b.google.com (mail-wm1-x32b.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::32b]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E576D3A0EEC for ; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 10:11:39 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wm1-x32b.google.com with SMTP id p22so8076955wmg.3 for ; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 10:11:39 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=UeFba02PrYoyG+ASgiEsCbMoa1gPWH1PPq6hbprSMKA=; b=HXQbMv8Grv4Pionb9gw5KHhuQdw3GYx1k15TZ+wc7mNxDUyaU1L3ssHEKjlzm5xgf/ 9cFGePnOpsB224Wdpbn18ddM9siWjWNrqCz4dxexi8wHu756NKaz7DtRrXBoc5BcX6Ru k2rgH2kMFueiN/JHL+HlpaKUcGLi84NQHrsacbTlorlKf6K/Mqa48ycbrWRYyb/eXLNL EfWGuTHE/Vv4B09/4CMDdWgHwdxZq4ZH5kYMUIB6V0lFuCNZYj2Yu6gkj53fo1kph4Ie 5LqFRgsZZ5spR/wZlOu6Px/QWePI+L3dX0ILXxzQTIcayaRzofefNgbLzm8TPgqbd+Vj USvA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=UeFba02PrYoyG+ASgiEsCbMoa1gPWH1PPq6hbprSMKA=; b=bgykvYjR0D6ker4L9IC/XqxODqvChJtrVrPK0pI10MJRkE8V8rimau7awHWjM5ltrU 2j95GlO7/dMHmTkYn6loExhoKnzULjfmWaYeCH4xlH/4xPd0cRlcL0tyNHe+iNWvoqwi UTiSPcIH7WtgXkVpoa9+3Lm9ue4lExxE+H7wq3mIIOMcA0jKoRSLHPWwUJwyx2hNLkZM DIH+Jmq20OAeCZmis2Xw1JD0OZM27/cS/N+Eaj04pUMVxFpcOagOefO9zB4t7Up6juGe 8bxHYsV3tH6aaC19VPk5LQa5NtQ9242m+Vm8lc7OGh27pByNa46uHx9QtsweYFvggArK ymog== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531Uq0sAOZrQX1knce140J+8dQk4Avra5EFsu7pAWGMZPJWMOShC NSG+Kkuz1GkO2BZb22AJ946zSrat3ByrP3bMlgc= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJypW3kUzQAiD2Uf7n4TPYy/aDVj3OEeaQ+aHVi8HUGDmQ+sazJ8G0wy8D+YWpRohAXoZLjmSLSjaqZfdJWWQ7A= X-Received: by 2002:a7b:c458:: with SMTP id l24mr5589276wmi.136.1605809498226; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 10:11:38 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <8BB5BFBF-0673-40AC-8799-A715B43CF169@gmail.com> <99680A94-9C7B-4C1C-A98E-BABEDC985EBC@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <99680A94-9C7B-4C1C-A98E-BABEDC985EBC@gmail.com> From: Daniel P Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 13:11:26 -0500 Message-ID: To: Glyn Normington Cc: jsonpath@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] On duplicates, and the consensus therewith X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 18:11:42 -0000 I checked Goessner online, and the results were $[0,0] applied to [0,1] yields [0,0] $['a','a'] applied to {"a":1} yields [1,1] I'm surprised that that broke so many other implementations in Burgmer's comparison. I was interested in what jayway, would do, as it was one of the first, if not the first, to follow a well defined grammar, and had a novel interpretation of the meaning of the union operator applied to an object. A number of commercial implementations were based on jayway, including Oracle's JSONPath. From Burgmer's site, it looks like the Bash JSONPath.sh and the Objective-C SMJJSONPath mimic jayway behaviour. In jayway $[0,0] applied to [0,1] yields [0,0] $['a','a'] applied to {"a":1} yields {"a":1} In npm jsonpath (node.js), which describes a departure from Goessner unions, "unions now yield real unions with no duplicates rather than concatenated results", $[0,0] applied to [0,1] yields 0 (without enclosing array) $['a','a'] applied to {"a":1} yields 1 (without enclosing array) Daniel On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 11:23 AM Glyn Normington wrote: > > On 18 Nov 2020, at 19:43, Glyn Normington wrote: > > > On 18 Nov 2020, at 17:01, Daniel P wrote: > > > On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 11:50 AM Glyn Normington > wrote: > > > Christoph is responsive to PRs, so we can add our own examples if we can = come up with them. Would [0,0] applied to [=E2=80=9Ca=E2=80=9D] be sufficie= nt for starters? Can you think of other distinct cases? > > Perhaps that and "$..['a','a']" applied to {"a" : 1} > > > Is the =E2=80=9C..=E2=80=9D essential? Not sure what it adds. > > > Daniel > > > > I ran the two queries through the JSONPath comparison suite, which compar= es the behaviour of 40 implementations: > > $[0,0] applied to ["a=E2=80=9D] gave the result ["a", "a=E2=80=9D] in 27 = cases and ["a=E2=80=9D] or =E2=80=9Ca=E2=80=9D In 8 cases, so there is a cl= ear consensus there. > > $['a','a=E2=80=99] applied to {"a":1} gave [1, 1] in 9 cases and 3 cases = with many implementations giving errors. > > See https://gist.github.com/glyn/cfc750d65ee32f5354013cea9ce7475e for the= two runs. > > I also tried to add these to the comparison matrix, but I=E2=80=99ve fail= ed to get a clean build so far. See https://github.com/cburgmer/json-path-c= omparison/pull/76. From nobody Thu Nov 19 10:25:20 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 96F843A0EFC for ; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 10:25:19 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.899 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=textuality-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id c_PcHJGbol-x for ; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 10:25:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-oi1-x233.google.com (mail-oi1-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::233]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 69D553A044A for ; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 10:25:18 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-oi1-x233.google.com with SMTP id j15so2058001oih.4 for ; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 10:25:18 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=textuality-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=MprzRwSw1SHUDmHlO+jOk42Izbu2NqaqCHGvh+GQc+Q=; b=XjnoGwEX8Nz9ve/+E0AxrRLGFybnVN4CuWUfDZ1aEo66AfRF1WwVI3bV36BQr1M2z/ EkmzZWML3H/17R58GBgZXK0sv13N2TQqNqg82dThG2BrD5qaTKsdEwsSY2duLUf1WmxY 0Ytdg+ZxNSa7HfEXT0Ef/7Doh5iKla2PPrvrUFnwwd90f2DJjNMXH4084xJzcJKzQOD+ F96ZKgXBN5OWKOSsrRewfIkLkMyLjhiOYpRKvKjHx1NEMLoRGp4ZEfmlEWaBTypGMoX4 z/EGllkLShvNAmhsX1OnJ+5jZegIYtOnyCmmH1VR1svJeqi7fXX5+8lfYJiLc9boHTPw 6Cwg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=MprzRwSw1SHUDmHlO+jOk42Izbu2NqaqCHGvh+GQc+Q=; b=Aqhv3jrHvN3JMe96UMiFYkjxX3UGCS5YLJDO5A4z5d/0kC1X7Hei9rHO2zBakUjzzj 7bQ0XAAf8enIzWB52/okDwjY9mlKO6L8PMCFLFyBFb96YG79suvTixVvZbESRn664FAm CrYTK9dBkv17BR1MDXArmBdu5A5RnabsLflJFCrliggvMyQaoeynHO8HmldAG7Qw8W8g mYDzbVuEVzY/2TPav3p0LRJNw0Fiz3h/098VnxoL8Xu3oUmcXW/pMzUYgX+LeyTS4j2t Mk093kSFFeYVdpAJoDjJKKMw8A3/VkUKTZ5+XlAeVGcv6Rs3AKiWv64tf9LsNQVjgQGR KRgA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5330uFsGWRJpJmXSKkg0UzdbM2WiWTb4Ajjd4Ah8LG/h/OSllNwO IrdhdunNkhOLN0AXBjPMnx5QjFLHpLMrjg5n1zfhiw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyXCLiPAYDXu4uaHHzAjiV/0g3GNYD+u96zibEL44zDykpIXpzQ0KKfwzUCZkpy6+JFa2DaV4sW6reBV0ylzvg= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6808:685:: with SMTP id k5mr107947oig.135.1605810317576; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 10:25:17 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <8BB5BFBF-0673-40AC-8799-A715B43CF169@gmail.com> <99680A94-9C7B-4C1C-A98E-BABEDC985EBC@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: From: Tim Bray Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 10:25:04 -0800 Message-ID: To: Daniel P Cc: Glyn Normington , jsonpath@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000008e60d505b479d9b0" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] On duplicates, and the consensus therewith X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 18:25:20 -0000 --0000000000008e60d505b479d9b0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 10:11 AM Daniel P wrote: > In jayway > > $[0,0] applied to [0,1] yields [0,0] > $['a','a'] applied to {"a":1} yields {"a":1} > I'm trying to build a mental model that explains the ['a','a'] behavior and entirely failing. Does this make sense to anyone? > > --0000000000008e60d505b479d9b0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 10:11 AM Daniel P <danielaparker@gmail.com> wrote= :
In jayway

$[0,0] appli= ed to [0,1] yields [0,0]
$['a'= ;,'a'] applied to {"a":1} yields {"a":1}

I'm trying to build a mental model that explains the ['a&= #39;,'a'] behavior and entirely failing. Does this make sense to an= yone?

--0000000000008e60d505b479d9b0-- From nobody Thu Nov 19 11:23:53 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F8BB3A1071 for ; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 11:23:51 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7xGOQ1eqioSY for ; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 11:23:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wr1-x42f.google.com (mail-wr1-x42f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::42f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2DE673A106D for ; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 11:23:50 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wr1-x42f.google.com with SMTP id c17so7591229wrc.11 for ; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 11:23:49 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=oX5sYaM1hM62dTwkygw2qY+RKNXSjooRPG5bWbw8iR8=; b=ZcscaqNSExZXygG4oLpILxonm/4YWAO8UTVFIOZMXn1P1BVuDQPmscgUmrGS9FCvbT ts52PDPtu2oQk7NXT//h21WFTSbf8aizlAKOsZgxbA4XJV6sRo64aKhT9levt89ekxwM IQjUNRpVvvgnwOXjqn8vGhgAYFW2+q9HmRecPvGsN1+68vxfyLmp0X3WkXkycFBJ/Yun ZUwNwGfSbXq9E5l1DtY9Yt/yvx9BAjDdnvtuuCHpN0a2wzFSEN5RtFWjJcT6uG0m1sMA OESEkvIZvLfq3yYMk62gLOXOkes9JSPV3HiUcYsTsxCTSyc7TUDioQe9sCYvwcUryFpT Ougg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=oX5sYaM1hM62dTwkygw2qY+RKNXSjooRPG5bWbw8iR8=; b=P3UNjGs9qthLiL1D4sv0qRbjrDL8KKiZbOxdtXU14GTkhscGYEUpdAJr9C6AJ6NbMO gWQqpGRSX5J0kCl2DKrpXAgGlLdvcOU78taLQTywGal52/6aKEsnEeK1V6h01QZN5hdu nkxmqpsVa+kECLCumZ5IYJA1EYdyO5bvkPeqW7iZmPkuez6+5lZrHOkNaVsDwoxiBeCR sZS54F54ikFeFWsVo1HK6VbMdmSpII/1UdB1k4B0M81ySqfXS9XWEgXI7g3mx5hXAIKt 5SEz/HugncxOJ0FTpm+VOt5vuBRmA3Ch6un/KusLavaUZjX7lZJpqVDRMh2xiMtUDDO3 Zkmg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530wVXpo+bZswRnYQwc+2WDh54iAw7ufjbI+yaX9deEv5G9a1HJK BH5IFQIqFCF1ZcbUYO2pKrNbdygrHvQqTjrvyNCZi+aVauIg5Q== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJx7pjWqFqdiAl2V9rI0dkjfj5O1Q3WKcCWQvwCvpUu3r5t9GqvTY7TIq/TMyguQMXXmjszGmCmEIQ8sUnyd7LU= X-Received: by 2002:adf:9066:: with SMTP id h93mr12620478wrh.166.1605813828410; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 11:23:48 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <8BB5BFBF-0673-40AC-8799-A715B43CF169@gmail.com> <99680A94-9C7B-4C1C-A98E-BABEDC985EBC@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: From: Daniel P Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 14:23:36 -0500 Message-ID: To: Tim Bray Cc: Glyn Normington , jsonpath@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] On duplicates, and the consensus therewith X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 19:23:51 -0000 That behaviour, and more generally jayway's interpretation of the union operator applied to objects, was ultimately accepted as a bug in 2017, see https://github.com/json-path/JsonPath/issues/395. It hasn't been fixed, and probably never will be, because of jayway's wide legacy base, and the fix would be a breaking change for its very considerable user base. And judging from Stackoverflow and other forums, users like that behaviour, not for reasons of grammatical niceness, but for the practical reason that it allows them to select from objects (key-value) pairs, rather than values disassociated from their keys. By comparison, JMESPath introduces both a MultiSelect List, https://jmespath.org/specification.html#multiselect-list, which is analogous to but more general than a JSONPath union, and a MultiSelect Hash, https://jmespath.org/specification.html#multiselect-hash, which results in a hash of (key-value) pairs, but with the keys provided by the user. Daniel On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 1:25 PM Tim Bray wrote: > > > > On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 10:11 AM Daniel P wrote: >> >> In jayway >> >> $[0,0] applied to [0,1] yields [0,0] >> $['a','a'] applied to {"a":1} yields {"a":1} > > > I'm trying to build a mental model that explains the ['a','a'] behavior and entirely failing. Does this make sense to anyone? >> >> From nobody Thu Nov 19 11:44:26 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C63753A10F0 for ; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 11:44:21 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.097 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, FREEMAIL_REPLY=1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vLVwOiIm8vCL for ; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 11:44:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wm1-x331.google.com (mail-wm1-x331.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::331]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 95D913A10EA for ; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 11:44:20 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wm1-x331.google.com with SMTP id 1so7806955wme.3 for ; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 11:44:20 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=SmzSd1yUoVgQK9agtI8421KNjswNz8gRoAWvMpZkTxU=; b=q/hypLlAL134HLCKdcFyBZay76aIuh2GAqyd4Yp2YH7NYWSRtV/7MqMJTe7r5YNWls 1Zg7b+AJcTllX3Ma33W1hzwQadW/urQa+IgrLdTMwCRF2cu9cjettuCN20Dq9BuOWXIc skgBqzWlJ6R1wjj/Anpyf2wWfi4Nhszi7Kg2iSdnJO9zWt44nbfMMoU1L3zbaVJmiT6H +T91o+9bwHhNFB3XOQPY3xq4uzklXlpk8z79KsYjzd2QRxRUIcnDGKk8ahY9c9WuCgK0 1mnIyLyVhrdme+meCDZRyd9oC/ayi/AYBoK1uIZMIqGFbEMqC4MVmvCz9c3BwsrHQZP/ Y44Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=SmzSd1yUoVgQK9agtI8421KNjswNz8gRoAWvMpZkTxU=; b=P2j42soCDuwa/BWEo/IOV1cE3eXe3uJds3/xLwgl8LQDoWHiVHXz0yK6rTJ6cwtTJ7 8aMXAjXlkK06YNHkyysNsRlE2xCf+SKZfplDmW9oTHAJqs4qJUZzdyH9VC4+qOBvMToB HOiYRiPLjd97SQoHd1Hky8YIc9xPFuXB4tz43O182ZY25cAv17fluotvMq1tdTgaZ9ht FqZhVsU2KRQ4egWelJPJntQeNDgkEvPxRJXRgEBXjga8ERBKC9LAZA0gBmmyL78Ta3ey sYo8afKbXWlc1etVv13IqavsT+/pF4UDAcsZ+eEqdwDX52uIa5TBw3uDONNX5voQLBEo /BbA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531L8MhnzSRIVDZsI/pcgBGLnLHnMZEMTqeRDAGPSSmqB1ab8v3v eakj8i43dcZ7H0NQPL4/tN0= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyUlbBikLACNwpQ124mjApulC11VCYG9oqXEcpk7QOwxjQWbhkqXEvScreLSwFKxwOCwzQIIw== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:f20d:: with SMTP id s13mr6467491wmc.156.1605815058926; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 11:44:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from normingtong-a01.lan (2.144.199.146.dyn.plus.net. [146.199.144.2]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id p4sm1522624wmc.46.2020.11.19.11.44.17 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 19 Nov 2020 11:44:18 -0800 (PST) From: Glyn Normington Message-Id: <1F008445-146D-497F-B42E-F6A5E772902D@gmail.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_07FEF85E-E7FB-4A34-97DB-F33BA504D971" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\)) Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 19:44:17 +0000 In-Reply-To: Cc: Daniel P , jsonpath@ietf.org To: Tim Bray References: <8BB5BFBF-0673-40AC-8799-A715B43CF169@gmail.com> <99680A94-9C7B-4C1C-A98E-BABEDC985EBC@gmail.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] On duplicates, and the consensus therewith X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 19:44:26 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_07FEF85E-E7FB-4A34-97DB-F33BA504D971 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 On 19 Nov 2020, at 18:25, Tim Bray wrote: >=20 >=20 >=20 > On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 10:11 AM Daniel P > wrote: > In jayway >=20 > $[0,0] applied to [0,1] yields [0,0] > $['a','a'] applied to {"a":1} yields {"a":1} >=20 > I'm trying to build a mental model that explains the ['a','a'] = behavior and entirely failing. Does this make sense to anyone? >=20 I think the term =E2=80=9Cunion=E2=80=9D is poor. If we think of it as = concatenation of results, then the result is as expected.= --Apple-Mail=_07FEF85E-E7FB-4A34-97DB-F33BA504D971 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 On = 19 Nov 2020, at 18:25, Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com> wrote:



On Thu, Nov = 19, 2020 at 10:11 AM Daniel P <danielaparker@gmail.com> wrote:
In jayway

$[0,0] = applied to [0,1] yields [0,0]
$['a','a'] = applied to {"a":1} yields {"a":1}

I'm trying to build a = mental model that explains the ['a','a'] behavior and entirely failing. = Does this make sense to anyone?


I think the term = =E2=80=9Cunion=E2=80=9D is poor. If we think of it as concatenation of = results, then the result is as expected.
= --Apple-Mail=_07FEF85E-E7FB-4A34-97DB-F33BA504D971-- From nobody Thu Nov 19 11:50:16 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF5C63A0AE5 for ; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 11:50:13 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.897 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7DyZBf1YsoJ5 for ; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 11:50:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 56D823A10B3 for ; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 11:50:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.217.120] (p548dcb31.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.141.203.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4CcVdZ5JDgzyYv; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 20:50:10 +0100 (CET) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\)) From: Carsten Bormann In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 20:50:10 +0100 Cc: Daniel P , jsonpath@ietf.org, Glyn Normington X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 627508210.211547-8d8ee9867fd8b0931921e41f8b4fa2f3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <15D56044-D0F0-4433-AA3E-A0C7FD72E273@tzi.org> References: <8BB5BFBF-0673-40AC-8799-A715B43CF169@gmail.com> <99680A94-9C7B-4C1C-A98E-BABEDC985EBC@gmail.com> To: Tim Bray X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] On duplicates, and the consensus therewith X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 19:50:14 -0000 On 2020-11-19, at 19:25, Tim Bray wrote: >=20 > I'm trying to build a mental model that explains the ['a','a'] = behavior and entirely failing. Does this make sense to anyone? I sure can hypothesize a mental model from this one data point (select = entries, i.e., key/value pairs, not just the values; just output the = selected subset). But of course this model would need to be verified with a few other test = cases. (Or one could read the code :-) Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten From nobody Thu Nov 19 12:40:36 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B4D93A11EE for ; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 12:40:34 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id x1B7EQ-zNpHz for ; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 12:40:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wr1-x433.google.com (mail-wr1-x433.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::433]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D592A3A11EC for ; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 12:40:32 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wr1-x433.google.com with SMTP id u12so7894247wrt.0 for ; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 12:40:32 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=VkbWzWNedcdF/iimGwTnMosnXwEDJMX0UfmOIQMC3Ak=; b=Qt6de+9OV+dIrCgt8v6VHwlsGitGEBCZVS+iUJThgdrW/J7Hs1Kgvt3CXz24il1IPZ 3v7LXe2AynHhSN7bNh6UFTWIoyCocJiOqxKmho8tj8ZtXAJ8RYk9PD+e5TwjYCHUADxv CLhPf5Q0Xv/K4YykK5BaLmPcXIu48Zl/Eb2dkxOfraHEgl8zUpBEBZoVaY/mNtoeAY/Z W5ihYEFYJETzLnpnYegpxXEC5nMCHCq8x/MDLNB8Q2Vj6BVF7Aa4kOBQy0y9XLnDliZZ mH1T8akk3+1H4/TflQE24R+v8aBFnN/hXwTIMsbSx7TFP1DfHC8t6eigFWMxD+mUGJh2 DXhg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=VkbWzWNedcdF/iimGwTnMosnXwEDJMX0UfmOIQMC3Ak=; b=dmASSip32+CREnxHkTAqFL3ua5EcUdxdoHSnLL1FVuF4/V7wnusS2v+GMwZv55np8e pF3cMBO8hWhabbF1ny4rITaPqz6rH0EaqnVDJ6eEycpoknXXMrSM2USxCYcvu6ZruhUe dU/hhQzAUCGcWrG13PfkOMfEhQSA5ru5KV5yProykfSUw6mCIUuTg9OxMbgly/Qa2u4S k0a/aeSIsVX/bMUPqVZUaRUkj2nxTmio96dPCgPErJDzyslmRyBOU1VcI5x2tFBgFBN2 JledcUePdedLspSe0ye4kAU/8Lxe8Q9CHrWB7qwts4ffRaYvrBsv8U3As+fBjz1tXyx4 8f4A== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532q+J2ar3wGCoBEUFH6WVscUwLzHI99JNN+LHJTktCERoejGdoQ 9o0cDz2QxCRqXRrBBCO4iKXt6BaePchBFzR0RJ4= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJz3JPcAtHmx98WbcY3SYysqBqyjZaoW3PEUnLyQyRjwl77tjdDSral75Nb1s6jX9Vdhg27eInRT4fPhzMdkXBc= X-Received: by 2002:adf:ec4f:: with SMTP id w15mr11643741wrn.86.1605818431096; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 12:40:31 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <8BB5BFBF-0673-40AC-8799-A715B43CF169@gmail.com> <99680A94-9C7B-4C1C-A98E-BABEDC985EBC@gmail.com> <1F008445-146D-497F-B42E-F6A5E772902D@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <1F008445-146D-497F-B42E-F6A5E772902D@gmail.com> From: Daniel P Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 15:40:19 -0500 Message-ID: To: Glyn Normington Cc: Tim Bray , jsonpath@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] On duplicates, and the consensus therewith X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 20:40:34 -0000 On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 2:44 PM Glyn Normington wrote: > > I think the term =E2=80=9Cunion=E2=80=9D is poor. I agree with that comment, but it's partly because I'm used to SQL UNION, which is different. I prefer the JMESPath term for an analogous construct, MultiSelect List, https://jmespath.org/specification.html#multiselect-list. Daniel From nobody Thu Nov 19 13:27:43 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 873953A126A for ; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 13:27:41 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.099 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kE8av225663T for ; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 13:27:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wm1-x330.google.com (mail-wm1-x330.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::330]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A4AE43A0D74 for ; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 13:27:39 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wm1-x330.google.com with SMTP id a186so5719384wme.1 for ; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 13:27:39 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=Lt9rO2rRoTlNOiLYDd9BOnGSl52LCJ3AeJhwbdHrdmo=; b=eeFWMJgkivCjdhE6IJhUKQhtvReA+2KJt07cMR/OZ4ZSxuQZJ/L6V9rPXFGYm1Fql8 sA5Wo4VHgfLu1T8Zn7jCaPohWIa+/FrTQ0fH8jku2R2yVr7Cr0GkpSEI0Rpvyn2tqSIH alwc9SLBKZKYPrnjA/a8OmmCTcbzQKef4Rz02I2D7LGMwDJi+4H6CNGfdVyRQ2Bi98jN dlsna/ZXii3irHcjT77eBM/UBCnNM2+erZGLPuDkCmODcHqcsmvWgvfgI4M0M+q4A26l 9Y+zS8nf6btDhg0BiEtynPnwu7r9GUc5NcBdn1F3Y7vDBKct34XnTKdm/TgNGgeM8XrS hFLQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Lt9rO2rRoTlNOiLYDd9BOnGSl52LCJ3AeJhwbdHrdmo=; b=TaOuTksf+uQLOO7O8sSr+Sln7vnJYLnPj2oSpwssESnhz1/+0zT1f4gj/lQRMQGK5g U/lGOtL7CuvvseM5rO26qpbwUfK2kfr9CfcJRIeH4lw2hKf7lCY2KBtycgZpU43u1KJ8 DTHzs/1IDbLVfHA5qsHVBXnDgw6gqjLnfFpvl7S0fyE9hfuJcvGLnUvc44j5f4NegB1R 4fGX8m7i2+4LbKg889KEpcZL172SmiHSjEV5ucejpPAVZiLaiqhzcSnTUkJ/ttGG7AMq ROyvSVbjYHcRhRF3QHSpj3vbMTHvWSKCk87eOzGUimoNfDDuMx9Oehtsi2ulyfq78+sq uveA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530YfgGljLMoTz0EIRChh1qhNQ18KiX5wSqhkSBPLxtUQQbKnpjf cqy1mucF/JsYvR9WpnHvxqJRlBgoeO6csxEhx1k= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJytvuFQ+N6mfyv2PCyiv3dtkXZlbJLOwV86pXK0GQXIh6hCl6e/VILcyiMLtSv458n6FcteQJGS0U7WvAl4yN8= X-Received: by 2002:a1c:e305:: with SMTP id a5mr3944478wmh.45.1605821257700; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 13:27:37 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <8BB5BFBF-0673-40AC-8799-A715B43CF169@gmail.com> <99680A94-9C7B-4C1C-A98E-BABEDC985EBC@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: From: Daniel P Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 16:27:25 -0500 Message-ID: To: Tim Bray Cc: Glyn Normington , jsonpath@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] On duplicates, and the consensus therewith X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 21:27:41 -0000 On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 2:23 PM Daniel P wrote: > > That behaviour, and more generally jayway's interpretation of the > union operator applied to > objects, was ultimately accepted as a bug in 2017, see > https://github.com/json-path/JsonPath/issues/395. > It hasn't been fixed, and probably never will be, because of jayway's > wide legacy base, and the fix > would be a breaking change for its very considerable user base. And > judging from Stackoverflow > and other forums, users like that behaviour, not for reasons of > grammatical niceness, but for the > practical reason that it allows them to select from objects > (key-value) pairs, rather than values > disassociated from their keys. > Here are a couple of examples of folks that really like the jayway approach, https://github.com/dchester/jsonpath/issues/86 https://github.com/danielaparker/jsoncons/issues/198 Daniel From nobody Fri Nov 20 09:20:06 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4324E3A100D for ; Fri, 20 Nov 2020 09:20:05 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ylgwry-PyBCn for ; Fri, 20 Nov 2020 09:20:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wm1-x336.google.com (mail-wm1-x336.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::336]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3EC203A0991 for ; Fri, 20 Nov 2020 09:19:49 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wm1-x336.google.com with SMTP id p22so11039884wmg.3 for ; Fri, 20 Nov 2020 09:19:49 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Y/R/kIdEUjQWQLukDj14uniAFJOm2q2iwHgiieFGbmE=; b=X8RK027pOE3LHDGwWE3Z85/QmjpyiYfKP+C756G128ZImqFNqSOErmUajZ5xYP+N8H 6B7soX0Djncr59i1hCOyM9agR3mHiUDYigh2K2rmZ2qWRdZEtQkESxQWFTdg+QRCCwbp voArEMHGFRYvd6rzhmwnoWRE6MAmWdbaKw2KZKzJ/z3VFySlMb5RM8SBbIeeErcWPgaz DLKqaq1nE5/qXgU6VaNAbW9ISeImZpmGnx41KWxwMGGJorUWEnhDcP2JrVLbNPx0jZJo /p6YJTB79cTwNxo+kWNs6cElefOOx+O9dbECoYk3iWHKOQ0E9bTswx5urmt/+NH0kOcl JWKw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Y/R/kIdEUjQWQLukDj14uniAFJOm2q2iwHgiieFGbmE=; b=IJkxOmPLK3SZ6bh8BdeLZzZGGaWA8u4jPtJeh7F7Q+gYIcCXBBbjRyzNUlFLxRVz8X JNg96Ht8JKW+44Zy7YWbQtqnzw/ibHhivSct5OtHhf6RlbgEESxkiGRKE+dc3FLEcLXt Dhhefox02+dzeRaW24g1yTaguq/sfXlxQyu01q7bEH6ttVW1zu/68EUG87fcA5w+Uy8t 6MYSO+d1UUxoGX6SBTEbT57HztrHEpWSGXGEEvmEcV1RoMem1w4pIsMCfSMU8pg2vCAn EXIeK0VJZlML68R2C9Kfk/lfH1SfdYKeEt04MTQzOB7zuG+sZeW+7NOLdbYcjK4GP4M9 ayXw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533JFkMEEPPyDDSkzMrppw8WUrG+314yidhInbsnEisFCjmyCgu9 Z4bNEfB83kOEVoq4NeX+PlmTZOKEClZj37lTcjo= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwCkE/9eAUnqWtnAD+/+LcBftPt1EUMgjmHbjNjTRggfv8mUtjQu+14e3WDwq96GYqA4HPM9hHIGZKenQ2Iuxk= X-Received: by 2002:a1c:e305:: with SMTP id a5mr8250868wmh.45.1605892787538; Fri, 20 Nov 2020 09:19:47 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <8BB5BFBF-0673-40AC-8799-A715B43CF169@gmail.com> <99680A94-9C7B-4C1C-A98E-BABEDC985EBC@gmail.com> <1F008445-146D-497F-B42E-F6A5E772902D@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <1F008445-146D-497F-B42E-F6A5E772902D@gmail.com> From: Daniel P Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2020 12:19:35 -0500 Message-ID: To: Glyn Normington Cc: Tim Bray , jsonpath@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] On duplicates, and the consensus therewith X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2020 17:20:05 -0000 > On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 10:11 AM Daniel P wrote= : >> >> In jayway >> >> $[0,0] applied to [0,1] yields [0,0] >> $['a','a'] applied to {"a":1} yields {"a":1} > > > I'm trying to build a mental model that explains the ['a','a'] behavior a= nd entirely failing. Does this make sense to anyone? >> > I think the term =E2=80=9Cunion=E2=80=9D is poor. If we think of it as co= ncatenation of results, then the result is as expected. I think you could argue that. But it's inconsistent with the "union" operator applied to arrays. In "consensus" JSONPath (consistent with Goessnner and Burgmer's consensus), both the union operator applied to arrays, and the union operator applied to objects, are lossy. In the for= mer case, we lose the index position associated with the value, in the latter, we lose the key associated with the value. jayway's approach is lossy with the "union" operator applied to arrays, but retains the association between key and value with the union operator applied to objects. For reference, see https://cburgmer.github.io/json-path-comparison/results/union_with_keys.htm= l. On the "consistency be damned!" side, it does seem like "lost indexes" are of less concern to real users than "lost keys", judging from the weepin= g and gnashing of teeth exhibited by jaway people in the non-jayway universe, such as in this one, https://github.com/dchester/jsonpath/issues/86 Daniel On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 2:44 PM Glyn Normington wrote: > > On 19 Nov 2020, at 18:25, Tim Bray wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 10:11 AM Daniel P wrote= : >> >> In jayway >> >> $[0,0] applied to [0,1] yields [0,0] >> $['a','a'] applied to {"a":1} yields {"a":1} > > > I'm trying to build a mental model that explains the ['a','a'] behavior a= nd entirely failing. Does this make sense to anyone? >> >> > > I think the term =E2=80=9Cunion=E2=80=9D is poor. If we think of it as co= ncatenation of results, then the result is as expected. From nobody Mon Nov 23 02:33:31 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FA5D3A17F2 for ; Mon, 23 Nov 2020 02:33:29 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.803 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.803 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, FREEMAIL_REPLY=1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id f9iP1uNZ1lYD for ; Mon, 23 Nov 2020 02:33:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wm1-x32f.google.com (mail-wm1-x32f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::32f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 73A973A100A for ; Mon, 23 Nov 2020 02:33:28 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wm1-x32f.google.com with SMTP id d142so17380324wmd.4 for ; Mon, 23 Nov 2020 02:33:28 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=nJda94bFgZkmn+HhDs0Uu2Z0Q6Ofo4wvL/P+2U/8cWQ=; b=k45vQOwyiqDbBkF7xN8eoqRC0XvylJv5fcwcpTgReG08BzsYoCSRaUYODsRknFrQ/3 ozQV5Mg1XXyqChF6ak0x0OhitlQXWgjlKydSb1KSJJslrDmHMCe4K8i/Z2LOfbGtgC1Q oTuTcgSKkrjB0VNzfSyHKdcmVZ59tOaudN5/VMSlaWxT+nsBLAY3VBFErpz/BNa2ZinP gjjjuelMOQJzBX0BsDVW5+7Sqy3wdoDVDjQMuOJJM8r/2N0T82u6CU/Cjjy/a/WbJkxz CWtWVUUQmq6/KFwaJU7NK4VPHPUJVzB0DF4+3yKBA++GuyjSTpeKXRbaWNLCchnHZRlq LdaA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=nJda94bFgZkmn+HhDs0Uu2Z0Q6Ofo4wvL/P+2U/8cWQ=; b=jkdJiMQyTGOACpuuztTXrFCChNIACFeXPqZFrC9yCFD20NkhznCeHgO2JCC73nROy5 Kng6L5EzthJvNCkWqONQY7aIP8py7PY06yn7CzbxkIzPvsrcSysA5YMLLcZtCvGk5VUH 24SFn/ESDV1hPL55WOynT1frCVIsw3Pu+qyG5JhCzEnm568gVGO5pEFL0LD9OtEbgOfg JG8402Jbkm+puS2OCmqhvdpBoxodkximtKjcEy8G+fDtII+JLj33OnjIUQmlk8nnX2IR LS12BD3tKWj2KTknjbHEJ6ySeOSRSMXTUcP7QDdZQIecNAWv1UrMuKSaleiz4h6eJCY0 9spA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532t/OPKEsGueafqZ7gERjDFpZVdqW210OXugrlTWJ1JzPx/V+xN MKHE92y9vRhqbsqgDoWmNX4= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxnnJgq4dANinBmEHnBJLyA3hpmwbvT3K9EYOJ9pMAEeGLTvrVbvSlcmO+SmO3G+RLADnjHIQ== X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:210a:: with SMTP id u10mr22996387wml.98.1606127606712; Mon, 23 Nov 2020 02:33:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from normingtong-a01.lan (2.144.199.146.dyn.plus.net. [146.199.144.2]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id s13sm2334150wrt.80.2020.11.23.02.33.25 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 23 Nov 2020 02:33:25 -0800 (PST) From: Glyn Normington Message-Id: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_3436052C-D335-4EB6-92EC-C5EA27BFDE76" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\)) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2020 10:33:24 +0000 In-Reply-To: <1F008445-146D-497F-B42E-F6A5E772902D@gmail.com> Cc: Daniel P , jsonpath@ietf.org To: Tim Bray References: <8BB5BFBF-0673-40AC-8799-A715B43CF169@gmail.com> <99680A94-9C7B-4C1C-A98E-BABEDC985EBC@gmail.com> <1F008445-146D-497F-B42E-F6A5E772902D@gmail.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] On duplicates, and the consensus therewith X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2020 10:33:30 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_3436052C-D335-4EB6-92EC-C5EA27BFDE76 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 On 19 Nov 2020, at 19:44, Glyn Normington = wrote: >=20 > On 19 Nov 2020, at 18:25, Tim Bray > wrote: >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 10:11 AM Daniel P > wrote: >> In jayway >>=20 >> $[0,0] applied to [0,1] yields [0,0] >> $['a','a'] applied to {"a":1} yields {"a":1} >>=20 >> I'm trying to build a mental model that explains the ['a','a'] = behavior and entirely failing. Does this make sense to anyone? >>=20 >=20 > I think the term =E2=80=9Cunion=E2=80=9D is poor. If we think of it as = concatenation of results, then the result is as expected. My reply was about the general behaviour of unions giving duplicate = results rather than the case of: >> $['a','a'] applied to {"a":1} yields {"a":1} which was collapsed by my email client. My mental model doesn=E2=80=99t accommodate this behaviour either, so = I=E2=80=99m relieved it=E2=80=99s regarded as a (permanent?) bug. =20= --Apple-Mail=_3436052C-D335-4EB6-92EC-C5EA27BFDE76 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 On = 19 Nov 2020, at 19:44, Glyn Normington <glyn.normington.work@gmail.com> wrote:

On 19 Nov 2020, at = 18:25, Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com> wrote:



On Thu, Nov = 19, 2020 at 10:11 AM Daniel P <danielaparker@gmail.com> wrote:
In jayway

$[0,0] = applied to [0,1] yields [0,0]
$['a','a'] = applied to {"a":1} yields {"a":1}

I'm trying to build a = mental model that explains the ['a','a'] behavior and entirely failing. = Does this make sense to anyone?


I think the term = =E2=80=9Cunion=E2=80=9D is poor. If we think of it as concatenation of = results, then the result is as = expected.

My reply was about the general behaviour of unions giving = duplicate results rather than the case of:

$['a','a'] = applied to {"a":1} yields = {"a":1}

which was collapsed by my email = client.

My mental = model doesn=E2=80=99t accommodate this behaviour either, so I=E2=80=99m = relieved it=E2=80=99s regarded as a (permanent?) bug.
 
= --Apple-Mail=_3436052C-D335-4EB6-92EC-C5EA27BFDE76-- From nobody Mon Nov 23 03:19:37 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3322F3A07DE for ; Mon, 23 Nov 2020 03:19:35 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.198 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.198 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DU1x4UFX7q-S for ; Mon, 23 Nov 2020 03:19:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wr1-x42b.google.com (mail-wr1-x42b.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::42b]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3EA753A07D3 for ; Mon, 23 Nov 2020 03:19:33 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wr1-x42b.google.com with SMTP id r17so18254877wrw.1 for ; Mon, 23 Nov 2020 03:19:33 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=8eh5BtXI4w3BGBR0HRMXWr47utGnELHwENUDgxYigxY=; b=dX4gq/o84xymLImChfdt0H1+uv8ksYfgR3bI3biiFj4J26jqgL+mPJQPYAwD7fmT5m 7NMBHRXioQbN9bTzDNdsA7Shf0o7ZCWuPyfIYtXwddTt7M3TUfJ48SrdlZr02Za4Krl2 K1I6POgfJ+yaZxxjqd8AuW4qy9u1C8sYZnSnTdV/9Hk2Efajsu1rV2hrcgJFVkrDVRtd +sjfMiM13UmEE0Afqvvq3mosbr/0StUzrZupG9dGButo31Fj85OClpdTGJEvSvQUvhNy H0Pna4pR076Cj8/FoFK7ndtGjMSdNcb/SJSOKF6twNpHjhdQrLQ8ubIsrrRWOLOAYtQs 0Adg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=8eh5BtXI4w3BGBR0HRMXWr47utGnELHwENUDgxYigxY=; b=dgamjUYmRe8sKikjE/T5gXfqHP3ActvnTDHdwfExf7wLQ6ze4SrTWVrPFUwSKYHHeM VNjfbIivQeRSS1wFqtH0B2DM7SQA1Mpn9zm2byz2Y6RcyRwBq6PHisguVlxDyPMsVwko KlXico/vdVtEOwdP05jByRfR1UEdLtWxk/nSrIAWfFDCmD0fk6IaB5C3kJs7BbFxooAj qB4F1E1JpyUiXkzD3TOOK5F9/wO9eQFzOE1vN0mNksdtflQQJobD0jfFyBA4FviGmUIq EEtNvOD8ARpgyyeAaUEhRGFLi5W2lZoHvXe9RE2f9JYL8HTVsgtNxpFZQGFxGvvXMG1A KmJw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533n3dU7q3DN2HyaAsR4VUBbw7H/yC/9E5/wSNYXNWMx/3g6KJ/V dwxyJ6IP5KjUerHPsqR3jIs= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJx6EhnscBmfaJfNaIskt1kbDcrOv7djWxDJV06S4niTfDOB8XOGMjqlCLmtpHgvQ9h4sprVDQ== X-Received: by 2002:adf:e5c4:: with SMTP id a4mr32520689wrn.56.1606130370443; Mon, 23 Nov 2020 03:19:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from normingtong-a01.lan (2.144.199.146.dyn.plus.net. [146.199.144.2]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id n123sm15767805wmn.38.2020.11.23.03.19.29 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 23 Nov 2020 03:19:29 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\)) From: Glyn Normington In-Reply-To: <99680A94-9C7B-4C1C-A98E-BABEDC985EBC@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2020 11:19:28 +0000 Cc: jsonpath@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <8BB5BFBF-0673-40AC-8799-A715B43CF169@gmail.com> <99680A94-9C7B-4C1C-A98E-BABEDC985EBC@gmail.com> To: Daniel P X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] On duplicates, and the consensus therewith X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2020 11:19:35 -0000 On 19 Nov 2020, at 16:23, Glyn Normington = wrote: >=20 > On 18 Nov 2020, at 19:43, Glyn Normington = wrote: >>=20 >> On 18 Nov 2020, at 17:01, Daniel P wrote: >>>=20 >>> On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 11:50 AM Glyn Normington >>> wrote: >>>>=20 >>>> Christoph is responsive to PRs, so we can add our own examples if = we can come up with them. Would [0,0] applied to [=E2=80=9Ca=E2=80=9D] = be sufficient for starters? Can you think of other distinct cases? >>>>=20 >>> Perhaps that and "$..['a','a']" applied to {"a" : 1} >>=20 >> Is the =E2=80=9C..=E2=80=9D essential? Not sure what it adds. >>=20 >>>=20 >>> Daniel >>=20 >=20 > I ran the two queries through the JSONPath comparison suite, which = compares the behaviour of 40 implementations: >=20 > $[0,0] applied to ["a=E2=80=9D] gave the result ["a", "a=E2=80=9D] in = 27 cases and ["a=E2=80=9D] or =E2=80=9Ca=E2=80=9D In 8 cases, so there = is a clear consensus there. >=20 > $['a','a=E2=80=99] applied to {"a":1} gave [1, 1] in 9 cases and 3 = cases with many implementations giving errors. >=20 > See https://gist.github.com/glyn/cfc750d65ee32f5354013cea9ce7475e for = the two runs. >=20 > I also tried to add these to the comparison matrix, but I=E2=80=99ve = failed to get a clean build so far. See = https://github.com/cburgmer/json-path-comparison/pull/76. Christoph Burgmer kindly came to my aid and now we have two more rows in = the matrix: Union with duplication from array (consensus): = https://cburgmer.github.io/json-path-comparison/results/union_with_duplica= tion_from_array.html Union with duplication from object (no consensus): = https://cburgmer.github.io/json-path-comparison/results/union_with_duplica= tion_from_object.html From nobody Wed Nov 25 08:54:28 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B88C3A1A94 for ; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 08:54:27 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.097 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, FREEMAIL_REPLY=1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2xGaI6443l2V for ; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 08:54:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wm1-x334.google.com (mail-wm1-x334.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::334]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F2DDE3A1A9A for ; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 08:54:22 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wm1-x334.google.com with SMTP id x22so2581856wmc.5 for ; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 08:54:22 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=Nzqx1tpaqT0/qAGjINGpKtbOSzlxDq4rnVeq+3DoJaU=; b=tN047iNcO7eDDzCJQzPCRrS47nnGggV+y8Q4MOjE+BFCiRdCjWvyt2/74aRNnqKNYq FjIZlWt+gLBRNMqnpDQME4Bc4J4PixThMWpkK+mYpQ/CcHxaXfP/Yqsaxd/eL6HH74WC k4gkkaqi46hg96B7W244+PILJvmDGPhqP1mT18jaxK/kSiOnPfZGagtpT58Le3DoVZtk 2cel9jo99KcGXtK7/HvkscKlQ9DrnWvKe07pVVEE3qjoBLU3PObhbs6PlZjCg3YyhsRr P5xdzjp5iA89sd/wVJIbI3h8vcRg/N8yvrlh20T6mkpEfqGD70GaGfYJY22hoVDhwnbM 3RrA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=Nzqx1tpaqT0/qAGjINGpKtbOSzlxDq4rnVeq+3DoJaU=; b=UcoCOspgQBvtK1dfRp+dfhzL9OcvAsC2MVSOpQ2Bz6/HP93W5g8jYPPmqZoS0CDRFY xOXDaoY9OWZx/fKyLM39H8zwU3ZY8O/O7e3sTDR5O2qIY88SZ5deEAzwU8BXynvJEqox fdir73AG9BUZBD81K+M4XFLsU1XJwyDXa+9aZyc5pkmaJuvttX5yGPcRoeuWa+ZWl0q0 FcIjJlHmyPeaEs3C96P1MJ8hOurESFYp4/ZX4uHl5edkfnMmO5SNHauSGdLhFWl4elr0 EajEUW1FowD//c1Lh2PuuHe/HlFEivwrfQM+kdLSy7d56tQ980eBWasOnlcaVmOUfkB7 Ae8A== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533WVufCFK4UnD70gkjwMGn5lqvbAzLE0iqwORVXZnMP6V9rSRXX Bs9XbKMqaJxdTVmpuZlGVTM= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJz+IjHTFiGbYFofQgxH9OZPm40Tw5ni213a9EtR2PlmVV0+rkQ5auG0CbGPmA8WtHyECZKT8g== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:21c1:: with SMTP id h184mr5073905wmh.106.1606323261293; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 08:54:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from normingtong-a01.lan (2.144.199.146.dyn.plus.net. [146.199.144.2]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b18sm5752157wrt.54.2020.11.25.08.54.19 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 25 Nov 2020 08:54:20 -0800 (PST) From: Glyn Normington Message-Id: <3926457F-875E-4FBF-B9B5-B09FF81855F5@gmail.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_1CDA08C1-1434-444C-89CA-591462EDE9BE" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\)) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 16:54:19 +0000 In-Reply-To: <448EAD4C-D46F-40C3-9DAE-B5BB8CA458AA@gmail.com> Cc: Daniel P , jsonpath@ietf.org To: Carsten Bormann References: <526A1BBB-17DE-441B-BBD3-3B1F184C366B@tzi.org> <448EAD4C-D46F-40C3-9DAE-B5BB8CA458AA@gmail.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] Remarks on the array slice operator described in https://jsonpath-standard.github.io/internet-draft/#name-array-selector-2 X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 16:54:27 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_1CDA08C1-1434-444C-89CA-591462EDE9BE Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 I took a crack at those editorial changes. Please see: https://github.com/jsonpath-standard/internet-draft/pull/41 = > On 17 Nov 2020, at 15:20, Glyn Normington = wrote: >=20 > The improvements below are welcome. I=E2=80=99ve made one = clarification below. >=20 > On 14 Nov 2020, at 20:08, Carsten Bormann > wrote: >>=20 >> On 2020-11-14, at 20:30, Daniel P > wrote: >>>=20 >>>> From: Glyn Normington > >>>>> On 12 Nov 2020, at 17:37, Daniel P > wrote: >>>=20 >>>>> Note that a slice expression in Goessner is defined with reference = to >>>>> the (long since abandoned) ECMASCRIPT 4. The original link is = lost, >>>>> but there is some discussion here, >>>>> = https://web.archive.org/web/20070125020659/developer.mozilla.org/es4/propo= sals/slice_syntax.html = . >>>>=20 >>>> We plugged that gap in the G=C3=B6ssner article thus: >>>>=20 >>>> = https://jsonpath-standard.github.io/internet-draft/#name-array-selector-2 = >>>>=20 >>>> which may be a safer starting point for the WG. >>>>=20 >>> Thanks! The ABNF for an array slice in that reference >>>=20 >>> integer =3D [%x2D] (%x30 / (%x31-39 *%x30-39)) >>>=20 >>> array-slice =3D [ integer ] ws %x3A ws [ integer ] >>> [ ws %x3A ws [ integer ] ] >>> ; start:end or start:end:step >>=20 >> Looks good. =46rom an editorial point of view, I=E2=80=99d use a = separate definition DIGIT and DIGIT1 for %x30-39 and %x31-39 for = readability. I=E2=80=99d also use "-" and "0" for the non-range = terminals %x2D and %x30. (It may occasionally be necessary to use hex = outside ranges, i.e., for case-sensitive letters, unless we want to use = the ABNF extensions for case-sensitive letters in RFC 7405 =E2=80=94 = e.g., for the escapes. Please see the end of = https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4997#page-44 = for how this can be kept = readable.) >>=20 >>> is consistent with JMESPath, Python, and my understanding of >>> ECMASCRIPT 4. Perhaps the comment could be expanded to highlight = that >>> all integer parts are optional. >>=20 >> That is clearly said in the ABNF, but it certainly doesn=E2=80=99t = hurt to spell this out in English as well. >> (Also, the third colon with the optional integer following is = optional.) >>=20 >> The most obvious misunderstanding trap that is set up in the above = draft is HEXDIG; this needs a English language comment that the letters = A-F are indeed case-insensitive (i.e., also a-f). >>=20 >>> I think this sentence is awkward: >>>=20 >>> "An array slice is a union element consisting of two or three = integers >>> (in base 10 and which may be omitted) separated by colons." >>=20 >> I think what this is trying to say is that [0:3] is exactly = equivalent to [0, 1, 2], which is a union operator, so the result of = [0:3] should also be what can be called a =E2=80=9Cunion element=E2=80=9D.= Detailed terminology to be fixed... >=20 > I added =E2=80=9Cis a union element" to remind the reader that an = array slice is just one kind of union element. That may not be = necessary. >=20 > I wasn=E2=80=99t thinking of any equivalence between an array slice = and a union of array indices, although that=E2=80=99s an interesting = observation, especially as we address the more general questions of = duplication and ordering. >=20 >>=20 >>> More specifically, the use of the term "union element" seems to me = to >>> be unnatural and unnecessary. Nothing would be lost by substituting >>> "An array slice consists of ..." >>>=20 >>> Moreover, Goessner uses the term "union" once in >>> https://goessner.net/articles/JsonPath/ = , and appears to be referring >>> to expressions of the form >>>=20 >>> union =3D "[" ( expression *( "," expression ) ) "]" >>>=20 >>> where minimally one comma is required (Goessner's shorthand notation = is [,]). >>=20 >> The ABNF in draft-goessner-dispatch-jsonpath-00.txt merges this case = with the single value-expression case, so [3], [3, 4], and [3, 4, 5] are = handled by the same production, making the result of [3] a (trivial) = union as well. >>=20 >> Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten >>=20 >> --=20 >> Jsonpath mailing list >> Jsonpath@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonpath = --Apple-Mail=_1CDA08C1-1434-444C-89CA-591462EDE9BE Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 I = took a crack at those editorial changes. Please see:

https://github.com/jsonpath-standard/internet-draft/pull/41=

On 17 Nov 2020, at 15:20, Glyn Normington = <glyn.normington.work@gmail.com> wrote:

The improvements = below are welcome. I=E2=80=99ve made one clarification below.

On 14 Nov 2020, at 20:08, Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> wrote:

On 2020-11-14, at 20:30, Daniel P = <danielaparker@gmail.com> = wrote:

From: Glyn Normington <glyn.normington@gmail.com>
On 12 Nov 2020, at 17:37, Daniel P <danielaparker@gmail.com> wrote:

Note that = a slice expression in Goessner is defined with reference to
the (long since abandoned) ECMASCRIPT 4. The original link is = lost,
but there is some discussion here,
https://web.archive.org/web/20070125020659/developer.mozilla.or= g/es4/proposals/slice_syntax.html.

We plugged that gap in the G=C3=B6ssner article thus:

https://jsonpath-standard.github.io/internet-draft/#name-array-= selector-2

which may be a safer = starting point for the WG.

Thanks! The ABNF for an array slice in that = reference

integer =3D [%x2D] (%x30 / = (%x31-39 *%x30-39))

array-slice =3D [ = integer ] ws %x3A ws [ integer ]
          &nb= sp;      [ ws %x3A ws [ integer ] ]
          &nb= sp;            = ;   ; start:end or start:end:step

Looks = good.  =46rom an editorial point of view, I=E2=80=99d use a = separate definition DIGIT and DIGIT1 for %x30-39 and %x31-39 for = readability.  I=E2=80=99d also use "-" and "0" for the non-range = terminals %x2D and %x30.  (It may occasionally be necessary to use = hex outside ranges, i.e., for case-sensitive letters, unless we want to = use the ABNF extensions for case-sensitive letters in RFC 7405 =E2=80=94 = e.g., for the escapes.  Please see the end of https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4997#page-44 for how this can be kept = readable.)

is consistent with JMESPath, Python, and my = understanding of
ECMASCRIPT 4. Perhaps the comment could = be expanded to highlight that
all integer parts are = optional.

That is = clearly said in the ABNF, but it certainly doesn=E2=80=99t hurt to spell = this out in English as well.
(Also, = the third colon with the optional integer following is = optional.)

The = most obvious misunderstanding trap that is set up in the above draft is = HEXDIG; this needs a English language comment that the letters A-F are = indeed case-insensitive (i.e., also a-f).

I think this = sentence is awkward:

"An array slice is a = union element consisting of two or three integers
(in base = 10 and which may be omitted) separated by colons."

I think = what this is trying to say is that [0:3] is exactly equivalent to [0, 1, = 2], which is a union operator, so the result of [0:3] should also be = what can be called a =E2=80=9Cunion element=E2=80=9D.  Detailed = terminology to be fixed...

I added =E2=80=9Cis a union = element" to remind the reader that an array slice is just = one kind of union element. That may not be necessary.

I wasn=E2=80=99t = thinking of any equivalence between an array slice and a union of array = indices, although that=E2=80=99s an interesting observation, especially = as we address the more general questions of duplication and = ordering.


More specifically, the use of the term "union = element" seems to me to
be unnatural and unnecessary. = Nothing would be lost by substituting
"An array slice = consists of ..."

Moreover, Goessner uses = the term "union" once in
https://goessner.net/articles/JsonPath/, and appears to = be referring
to expressions of the form

union =3D "[" ( expression *( "," expression ) ) "]"

where minimally one comma is required = (Goessner's shorthand notation is [,]).

The ABNF in = draft-goessner-dispatch-jsonpath-00.txt merges this case with the single = value-expression case, so [3], [3, 4], and [3, 4, 5] are handled by the = same production, making the result of [3] a (trivial) union as = well.

Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten

-- 
Jsonpath mailing list
Jsonpath@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonpath

= --Apple-Mail=_1CDA08C1-1434-444C-89CA-591462EDE9BE-- From nobody Wed Nov 25 14:45:19 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 191EB3A1F26 for ; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 14:45:17 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HcvEP-8MP38T for ; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 14:45:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wm1-x32b.google.com (mail-wm1-x32b.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::32b]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6E7ED3A1F25 for ; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 14:45:15 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wm1-x32b.google.com with SMTP id a65so252417wme.1 for ; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 14:45:15 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=oQ/9IMVsakHGhdJjGH0G4yeqHNJGxYYLL1MkQgdhdEg=; b=Vv1SqzMqxlSVuvDLDmo6/IgeyYjW6lQPNvTXCXeyWZqUVaZse6/uzsyL1iNExzgNEK 4y0CWxiEulW7AjDM6gufSmBOV4frf+lDYs9SESIZk3co+fJ43N1jwuBgS5L5L7QJQJgv 4pCUZtdzl/sDZsRsLIAXzEqLzE8PFaBCDMPHCqvC5wnNdaobVggVABXzmZWt4xuhnXkH tXzj2XTAk1Ri5vZPVyrIsaD7oequHBXYpzgbElZzMsYDJR+eTPhPo6uv+98GcUPyeHvW zMt/RCQQ0o4Gp+e/QabuSDn3vWbAS1oDLm9Q8VQTMuJUXIAMPOM/NX8wtXTn7pNl35Gy +udg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=oQ/9IMVsakHGhdJjGH0G4yeqHNJGxYYLL1MkQgdhdEg=; b=LTq1Wp3+58F2unbXGO+KdhCq2XSSd1fn6QI1SqkQZepODkMB+eQajzlxyGwwiElXYI pv5+UdqgFmkSHsiAPdJah+QUdT5T4xhWTEhxY8WK4ZE2lIZLstqZL8x1LWzH8yVN7M95 PBR0ofCir4w5XgLTXdBvUVOKuyLhpMzv4MdhYfxqnLEgcyqHwDGbQux47mCaR7Lx4r4d MeSYeVEjRQkZU0us/a4zJoZn72mg6NyZbvvzZzQEc4Qz0m2U2+KGQtkrjD1dL2tR5phG XlcRK748RfXbz6o9eiXyKCglW0joyM0FbMlg2wLhU3GdqblXHzjvYam/2cP7syaKuWhw fmjw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM53306dKy0/RsZ1OA2KFgAXDtk0oNAflUvFNe0I/tQYQSJFAlGS+e 3rb3NQ+rpJDo0qLL/fp+4yDhg7VDfJlHLRSoimbKDa5Hj1xWQw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJybfak4H+aogZhUnb1TsWKII3mDhV4XeI1ddfxpk745NYYV0rjCSJ4CWiLpjm6mkKKUQctoymqWeKerM4e/CxE= X-Received: by 2002:a1c:e305:: with SMTP id a5mr6207481wmh.45.1606344313310; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 14:45:13 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Daniel P Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 17:45:02 -0500 Message-ID: To: jsonpath@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] Remarks on the array slice operator described in https://jsonpath-standard.github.io/internet-draft/#name-array-selector-2 X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 22:45:17 -0000 > From: Glyn Normington > Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] Remarks on the array slice operator described in https://jsonpath-standard.github.io/internet-draft/#name-array-selector-2 > I took a crack at those editorial changes. Please see: > > https://github.com/jsonpath-standard/internet-draft/pull/41 > This draft is evolving nicely, in my opinion, I'm certain that implementators will be appreciative of your efforts. I still dislike the use of "union element" in the definition of terms like "slice". Comparable specifications define "slice" by itself, without reference to where it is used. For that matter, I dislike the term "union", as conceptually these cannot sensibly be considered unions in an algebraic sence. I prefer the analogous JMESPath nomenclature, "MultiSelect list". More comments: (1) "A JSON Path is a", "A JSON Path MUST be" p. 1 Goessner never uses "JSON Path", Goessner consistently uses JSONPath (2) "A JSON Path is a string which selects zero or more nodes of any JSON document" p.1 "A JSON document is logically a tree of nodes with the document as the root node of the tree." p. 1 A JSONPath is an expression that when applied against JSON, returns JSON. Why introduce "JSON document" and "node"? RFC8259 makes no mention of "JSON document" or "node". Neither does ECMA-404 2nd edition. Goessner refers to "XML documents" and XPath nodes, but not to JSON documents or nodes. (3) "When step is 0, no elements are selected. This is the one case which differs from the behaviour of Python, which raises an error in this case." p. 10 Is there a rationale for that choice? As you note, in Python it is an error. In JMESPath it is also an error, see https://jmespath.org/specification.html#slices. Unless I've missed it, Christoph Burgmer doesn't have a test case for a slice where step is zero. Perhaps we can prevail upon him to add one. (4) "union-child" p.7 "union-child" is awkward, why not call it "quoted-string"? Daniel From nobody Thu Nov 26 01:47:35 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D8E23A0F22 for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 01:47:33 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.097 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id oDJfIyFUlD-i for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 01:47:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-qt1-x830.google.com (mail-qt1-x830.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::830]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A2CE23A0F0B for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 01:47:31 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-qt1-x830.google.com with SMTP id f27so734810qtv.6 for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 01:47:31 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=W7RmX2asxKAP4J7vB4ZkHfKkUSwDqHUm1pILiyewZ8M=; b=vAyEDlRuaYWtwdKuimur+sWu1Or0vOUAn1PuCHLV9nk/sRzwgOAzCBzsWq4CkYCczV 13NorB7APGSOpGjrsnTDENBiDnLcTwYkoKD3dmep+pf/+VJM/FoB2R9o4qpKDzcpL1HW QIJW31bnfWpmjRMwfinmfdHPCUwu/F+HVldi0L9dfyZ31FldzkjtkK2QhUK1YWLe4nbP +EMGwq5WSVHNZ7qtWpC4i40oJUfTCUc8+Z1PdVVzknxG24J8BipluS2gg/EVQE+Y01/w CrQQu9xfTFBFojzLX12OsBcIT1dBQ9rL6mziV7/1vKxZ6/8UgdiLzdVbT+wqn5iD+bwr +6+Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=W7RmX2asxKAP4J7vB4ZkHfKkUSwDqHUm1pILiyewZ8M=; b=MTt1fVJHzXNipogK/0390TM72kuWeF3aaNQNNQtHs0ZoUcCMYoQI0AeMGs/ej3r+2R PE7zmpzt4tUA47zo0OnpRoIN/7nvD/atZhxEEEKrAOdaFLGj/qk6+L6trtRwfCplorHi pa87dJ8yY0R2nlScQWWy8Za0fSpz/VyjS0tUq3qh0HWq1/T+CMRmnf5OaODYZPIrfypT eASSjF5NN4bvP2VFr50gElF1TKb4ht01ykC2q9LzwYwbokD5KRmDhhPsY6fH1XM2j8ZO YDm7AXp+XZNxZyKNOhTR+mj888qY/y7O2ZBzdrlHdmCQf6NTma4NaWoyodet5aT3cBoy ro3g== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532ug8QnIWkTACDqGCkSqQCVkEuQjaWL05PZ8Ef3v4YrvZsVy6aK sPai5iOQsINud6ZY1NaJt1SxJjHMF9H6vPxQudw= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwX/5zxyNJq3dEHJ+u4fsyHKcynMFB0bbtGh/sO2LtbZWwpK0Kj5AID2bvxVbluiXlC73en6GGcnAB63ujl60o= X-Received: by 2002:ac8:7559:: with SMTP id b25mr2210057qtr.51.1606384050717; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 01:47:30 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Marko Mikulicic Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2020 10:47:19 +0100 Message-ID: To: Daniel P Cc: jsonpath@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000b7482705b4ff6e31" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] Remarks on the array slice operator described in https://jsonpath-standard.github.io/internet-draft/#name-array-selector-2 X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2020 09:47:34 -0000 --000000000000b7482705b4ff6e31 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" > Comparable specifications define "slice" by itself, The slicing specification is quite complex. I was wondering if we could treat it as a "sub-specification", where we can talk about slices in abstract terms that don't need to reference other concepts from jsonpath. In particular, I was thinking of modeling a slice expression as a function from 4-tuples to integer sequences, e.g. {start: 1, end: 10, step: 2, len: 9} -> [1,3,5,7], and then treating this integer sequence as if the user explicitly passed it as indices in an array access expression. (A minor side effect of this choice would be that we can change what we call those indices in the array access expression without affecting the slicing sub-specification) On Wed, 25 Nov 2020 at 23:45, Daniel P wrote: > > From: Glyn Normington > > Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] Remarks on the array slice operator described in > https://jsonpath-standard.github.io/internet-draft/#name-array-selector-2 > > I took a crack at those editorial changes. Please see: > > > > https://github.com/jsonpath-standard/internet-draft/pull/41 > > > > This draft is evolving nicely, in my opinion, I'm certain that > implementators > will be appreciative of your efforts. I still dislike the use of > "union element" in the definition of terms like "slice". Comparable > specifications define "slice" by itself, without reference to where it > is used. For that matter, I dislike the term "union", as conceptually > these cannot sensibly be considered unions in an algebraic sence. I > prefer the analogous JMESPath nomenclature, "MultiSelect list". > > More comments: > > (1) "A JSON Path is a", "A JSON Path MUST be" p. 1 > > Goessner never uses "JSON Path", Goessner consistently uses JSONPath > > (2) "A JSON Path is a string which selects zero or more nodes of any > JSON document" p.1 > > "A JSON document is logically a tree of nodes with the document as the root > node of the tree." p. 1 > > A JSONPath is an expression that when applied against JSON, returns JSON. > Why introduce "JSON document" and "node"? RFC8259 makes no mention of > "JSON document" or "node". Neither does ECMA-404 2nd edition. Goessner > refers to "XML documents" and XPath nodes, but not to JSON documents > or nodes. > > (3) "When step is 0, no elements are selected. This is the one case > which differs from the behaviour of Python, which raises an error in > this case." p. 10 > > Is there a rationale for that choice? As you note, in Python it is an > error. In JMESPath it is also an error, see > https://jmespath.org/specification.html#slices. > > Unless I've missed it, Christoph Burgmer doesn't have a test case for > a slice where step is zero. Perhaps we can prevail upon him to add > one. > > (4) "union-child" p.7 > > "union-child" is awkward, why not call it "quoted-string"? > > Daniel > > -- > Jsonpath mailing list > Jsonpath@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonpath > --000000000000b7482705b4ff6e31 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> Comparable specifications define "slice" by= itself,

The slicing specification is quite complex. I w= as wondering if we could treat it as a "sub-specification", where= we can talk about slices in abstract terms that don't need to referenc= e other concepts from jsonpath.

In particular, I w= as thinking of modeling a slice expression as a function from 4-tuples to i= nteger sequences, e.g. {start: 1, end: 10, step: 2, len: 9} -> [1,3,5,7]= ,
and then treating this integer sequence as if the user explicit= ly passed it as indices in an array access expression.

(A minor side effect of this choice would be that we can change wh= at we call those indices in the array access expression without affecting t= he slicing sub-specification)


On Wed, 25 Nov= 2020 at 23:45, Daniel P <dan= ielaparker@gmail.com> wrote:
> From: Glyn Normington <glyn.normington.work@gmail.com<= /a>>
> Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] Remarks on the array slice operator described = in https://jsonpath-standar= d.github.io/internet-draft/#name-array-selector-2
> I took a crack at those editorial changes. Please see:
>
> https://github.com/jsonpath-standard= /internet-draft/pull/41
>

This draft is evolving nicely, in my opinion, I'm certain that implemen= tators
will be appreciative of your efforts. I still dislike the use of
"union element" in the definition of terms like "slice"= . Comparable
specifications define "slice" by itself, without reference to whe= re it
is used. For that matter, I dislike the term "union", as conceptu= ally
these cannot sensibly be considered unions in an algebraic sence. I
prefer the analogous JMESPath nomenclature, "MultiSelect list".
More comments:

(1) "A JSON Path is a", "A JSON Path MUST be" p. 1

Goessner never uses "JSON Path", Goessner consistently uses JSONP= ath

(2) "A JSON Path is a string which selects zero or more nodes of any JSON document" p.1

"A JSON document is logically a tree of nodes with the document as the= root
node of the tree." p. 1

A JSONPath is an expression that when applied against JSON, returns JSON. Why introduce "JSON document" and "node"? RFC8259 makes= no mention of
"JSON document" or "node". Neither does ECMA-404 2nd ed= ition. Goessner
refers to "XML documents" and XPath nodes, but not to JSON docume= nts
or nodes.

(3) "When step is 0, no elements are selected. This is the one case which differs from the behaviour of Python, which raises an error in
this case." p. 10

Is there a rationale for that choice? As you note, in Python it is an
error. In JMESPath it is also an error, see
https://jmespath.org/specification.html#slices.
Unless I've missed it, Christoph Burgmer doesn't have a test case f= or
a slice where step is zero. Perhaps we can prevail upon him to add
one.

(4) "union-child" p.7

"union-child" is awkward, why not call it "quoted-string&quo= t;?

Daniel

--
Jsonpath mailing list
Jsonpath@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonpath
--000000000000b7482705b4ff6e31-- From nobody Thu Nov 26 01:49:42 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B14B3A0F22 for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 01:49:41 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rkiLOTMyTA5N for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 01:49:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wr1-x430.google.com (mail-wr1-x430.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::430]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3D1323A0FD0 for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 01:49:39 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wr1-x430.google.com with SMTP id i2so1431941wrs.4 for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 01:49:39 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=7B0ZhUAQMGhpGeZxTxG4HpxZNgUaHNNNj4IDHo4dQ18=; b=czF0AUb/WXrK0Cv7dK3ly28Fy6mXwWYbD9WCWG265sn+xel7l6KsCIgu6T2lJYcNRL 6ey+dDyxnPshQlCa0BeYercTTTislZKEVqdy0h9iJ3bFcdXdXDou3JJXm+RPW9dan9rp bhFAUauDuu22E1tWYkovLwUuW2K8Qx5PUyq2EG82vhdbl+4ssR9UAgYd9Q1UUJgaWezU 4AlzQ/BYSpVAxSeZKkKivaB/F4tc0vDd6gdp8S6fnl26vgexM3HAeiXfukYoi/cX8uXG iP2h8WrgxqzIzWP1GfkWexdX1D5zq7+Sg4+PnFkic6rKtLXf6LEG2NFrlGALG8RMcKd5 SU7Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=7B0ZhUAQMGhpGeZxTxG4HpxZNgUaHNNNj4IDHo4dQ18=; b=ZlQ+afQ4fqkmTqW+YFpQ/rNPad04gBTlxMBBUL1meDMMmrDQ59Hqw/wUul3rdVjNGk eXbHc4uLz0PJjPNJkLOk3nGOQSXo+4HUYp+Iwuag4nLKlinTarsYdv072oB+z4BC9rdL hZqBkMud23nn4tesK4Qv7dqvO6I1C+EX/Fkuoz6gr8k3fnGVcbiKFcbqVTTpYwMP/1Ck gbkeYAANCSi07Sthu/HutmqzF+7vBMwFUn8jAb7m3PTIZ8bNEN8DdFsbGfMVyhARlxef IFT50NF5Md9lA+pcbViBRQO3RNS6oOcC7Fs8TPfUUFtLhjpDGWQnoDinIYZQSAYtVoNQ IPiA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5330EBVw/nnKCg/MyMr4DzXVgoETkO9WTjddqiipbgv9TvJMwMMh Uolp83BneIm+rZn9fgQ9Vwg= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzPSg+1kf+SRV3hatOSEYg9n8Lu9dNlYHe7NgvFhw4AdPRXMWTOpCVFYRGzSbhWqIbTLL3Xrw== X-Received: by 2002:adf:db4a:: with SMTP id f10mr2706555wrj.420.1606384177781; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 01:49:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from normingtong-a01.lan (2.144.199.146.dyn.plus.net. [146.199.144.2]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id f16sm8583896wrp.66.2020.11.26.01.49.36 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 26 Nov 2020 01:49:37 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\)) From: Glyn Normington In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2020 09:49:36 +0000 Cc: jsonpath@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <89140FFF-6B25-4ABC-8A25-92327B1313F3@gmail.com> References: To: Daniel P X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] Remarks on the array slice operator described in https://jsonpath-standard.github.io/internet-draft/#name-array-selector-2 X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2020 09:49:41 -0000 Thanks for these comments Daniel. Responses inline. It would be better to make comments in the pull request for ease of = threading and so other reviewers see them in context. Would you be happy = to do that? Regards, Glyn On 25 Nov 2020, at 22:45, Daniel P wrote: >=20 >> From: Glyn Normington >> Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] Remarks on the array slice operator described = in = https://jsonpath-standard.github.io/internet-draft/#name-array-selector-2 >> I took a crack at those editorial changes. Please see: >>=20 >> https://github.com/jsonpath-standard/internet-draft/pull/41 >>=20 >=20 > This draft is evolving nicely, in my opinion, I'm certain that = implementators > will be appreciative of your efforts. I still dislike the use of > "union element" in the definition of terms like "slice". Comparable > specifications define "slice" by itself, without reference to where it > is used. For that matter, I dislike the term "union", as conceptually > these cannot sensibly be considered unions in an algebraic sence. I > prefer the analogous JMESPath nomenclature, "MultiSelect list". >=20 > More comments: >=20 > (1) "A JSON Path is a", "A JSON Path MUST be" p. 1 >=20 > Goessner never uses "JSON Path", Goessner consistently uses JSONPath Yes, I know. I don=E2=80=99t mind switching if there=E2=80=99s a general = preference for =E2=80=9CJSONPath=E2=80=9D. The WG is entitled =E2=80=9CJSON Path=E2=80=9D, so it=E2=80=99s not = obvious what the consensus is. Deferring for the moment. >=20 > (2) "A JSON Path is a string which selects zero or more nodes of any > JSON document" p.1 >=20 > "A JSON document is logically a tree of nodes with the document as the = root > node of the tree." p. 1 >=20 > A JSONPath is an expression that when applied against JSON, returns = JSON. > Why introduce "JSON document" and "node"? RFC8259 makes no mention of > "JSON document" or "node". Neither does ECMA-404 2nd edition. Goessner > refers to "XML documents" and XPath nodes, but not to JSON documents > or nodes. Phrases like =E2=80=9Capplied against JSON=E2=80=9D feel imprecise. A = JSONPath isn=E2=80=99t applied to the notation per se, but to something written in the notation. Perhaps we should simply adopt the language of RFC 8259 and talk about = =E2=80=9Ca JSON text=E2=80=9D instead of =E2=80=9Ca JSON document=E2=80=9D. >=20 > (3) "When step is 0, no elements are selected. This is the one case > which differs from the behaviour of Python, which raises an error in > this case." p. 10 >=20 > Is there a rationale for that choice? As you note, in Python it is an > error. In JMESPath it is also an error, see > https://jmespath.org/specification.html#slices. The rationale is the supposed consensus of implementations. >=20 > Unless I've missed it, Christoph Burgmer doesn't have a test case for > a slice where step is zero. Perhaps we can prevail upon him to add > one. I will add that test. >=20 > (4) "union-child" p.7 >=20 > "union-child" is awkward, why not call it "quoted-string"? I wanted to give a better hint of the intended use. For now, I=E2=80=99ve = renamed this to =E2=80=9Cchild=E2=80=9D (as opposed to =E2=80=9Cdot = child=E2=80=9D). >=20 > Daniel >=20 > --=20 > Jsonpath mailing list > Jsonpath@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonpath From nobody Thu Nov 26 02:22:52 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 760F23A1044 for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 02:22:50 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.097 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id u6Qy_rR7o_na for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 02:22:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wr1-x42c.google.com (mail-wr1-x42c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::42c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AD7793A02D0 for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 02:22:48 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wr1-x42c.google.com with SMTP id p8so1540974wrx.5 for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 02:22:48 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=Vlc7rmwMF0KsSG+HlcykECd3uuOixCEAOXwma4xmthw=; b=gNnM+69IJ/jyFeini8IfkVjg5RKP1BrLvCk2naK+CPI3bq0TeiVB5mitwmuvamkanI LRqIcPHTcsFqTsiSauF7l+SU9JLR5WINM6pasATrmOEBwBJrWpbMk/mP+agiQRoWK9zz hoCBQx9Awkv0lHsz9gFoqRlrqDf7I10A78PQGrUW1M5t+8qsxOqCTOwKxlbJ+8czHYyu RlCKcrI3ZtZ3CE7c6VxUAMCg7UneY+bF97MN6UO6W7+sXJRiUlSe9lcVqYofhMlAl9LU f7Drqya1g4q2aq35pOjoUV0yFus6TJ3jfhfROp1RfvtsadsmS1JwVujVbbqLsP6YEAIe L+JQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=Vlc7rmwMF0KsSG+HlcykECd3uuOixCEAOXwma4xmthw=; b=bmDwwUX8P15Dy/Lny3MhYmPHZfsUmK8h8U2z7WkyDkh6EvjNwPCa4WcJk70693nslV VUc7itDpwfwAti+kgRGX+Phrbevjfvmv+9aEwUA5Oj2VnXyymHIJdGoVTic4N3hlWRPj UfaJTpwTgixjRe1hugya9HjJLTW1zzfrcIvqscxLwFNAlCE0nfmLStsZftH9dRULjOGW scQ0lJi9u5atLjTsJ0VN4/Oday74g9k0dfF8zbC5wLLhARwKBKanC5hDJ5qu06STcOZC ZhI9RTnVA2Vm+xO8Z209sEqPbnpRLTC6ARd3e2+WVoTc3h4AN7p7Byf/tI5ZhrGkyfyk 6n9Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531z8bGzcys4aEqpgh6Ls46zqL2v1dmVj62hPTEW5BKwOvbK5TNJ gacfzaqU0J4WXdqqX9by+Zk= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJww9pQZwmHVfS0/hw+fZtZ/5cLdu1F/L2QQxuY0p5liWAmAok/OX9Dx4yKZLHYFf50FCqvxJg== X-Received: by 2002:adf:e611:: with SMTP id p17mr2867280wrm.180.1606386167085; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 02:22:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from normingtong-a01.lan (2.144.199.146.dyn.plus.net. [146.199.144.2]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id o203sm1367991wmb.0.2020.11.26.02.22.46 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 26 Nov 2020 02:22:46 -0800 (PST) From: Glyn Normington Message-Id: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_23158E51-7C7A-4EC7-A686-50D328473E60" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\)) Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2020 10:22:45 +0000 In-Reply-To: <89140FFF-6B25-4ABC-8A25-92327B1313F3@gmail.com> Cc: jsonpath@ietf.org To: Daniel P References: <89140FFF-6B25-4ABC-8A25-92327B1313F3@gmail.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] Remarks on the array slice operator described in https://jsonpath-standard.github.io/internet-draft/#name-array-selector-2 X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2020 10:22:51 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_23158E51-7C7A-4EC7-A686-50D328473E60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On 26 Nov 2020, at 09:49, Glyn Normington = wrote: >=20 >> (3) "When step is 0, no elements are selected. This is the one case >> which differs from the behaviour of Python, which raises an error in >> this case." p. 10 >>=20 >> Is there a rationale for that choice? As you note, in Python it is an >> error. In JMESPath it is also an error, see >> https://jmespath.org/specification.html#slices = . >=20 > The rationale is the supposed consensus of implementations. >=20 >>=20 >> Unless I've missed it, Christoph Burgmer doesn't have a test case for >> a slice where step is zero. Perhaps we can prevail upon him to add >> one. >=20 > I will add that test. It turns out there is such a test already, but no consensus: = https://cburgmer.github.io/json-path-comparison/results/array_slice_with_s= tep_0.html = Maybe raising an error to be consistent with Python would be a good = move. What do others think? --Apple-Mail=_23158E51-7C7A-4EC7-A686-50D328473E60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii On = 26 Nov 2020, at 09:49, Glyn Normington <glyn.normington.work@gmail.com> wrote:

(3) = "When step is 0, no elements are selected. This is the one case
which differs from the behaviour of Python, which raises an = error in
this case." p. 10

Is = there a rationale for that choice? As you note, in Python it is an
error. In JMESPath it is also an error, see
https://jmespath.org/specification.html#slices.

The rationale is the supposed consensus of = implementations.


Unless I've missed it, = Christoph Burgmer doesn't have a test case for
a slice = where step is zero. Perhaps we can prevail upon him to add
one.

I will add that test.

It turns out there is such a test already, but no = consensus:


Maybe = raising an error to be consistent with Python would be a good move. What = do others think?

= --Apple-Mail=_23158E51-7C7A-4EC7-A686-50D328473E60-- From nobody Thu Nov 26 02:49:15 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4391A3A112A for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 02:49:13 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.097 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, FREEMAIL_REPLY=1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EndeV53QiXxh for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 02:49:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wr1-x42e.google.com (mail-wr1-x42e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::42e]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 594BC3A1128 for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 02:49:11 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wr1-x42e.google.com with SMTP id e7so1629045wrv.6 for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 02:49:11 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=+ky/FsBMf+HGOXkgsUDRjtfUVNOS3sFEcCbkAIRcCCc=; b=OSm9ID582NJsxr+ccVmaRmHNZHHNX9QMWHiSm3QusHUXNtymslWibkT2CTduPQPH08 r0F20/q4WOeAy/yLHkYgwdVOBq8PzTa7507+C9rLBcfmpI2QNhl8Z4GF6egFYRk3kG+S e1whmHHK9VF6xvI0Cmw8p97w1BxDPF8DHkgVIpD6UYHT8mzRGk4HSXLB5OXkCue6A4zF nQm3WnBwQRvBg4o32ibo8klLHcvSKUh5qARAv2bT1YeWpQmrhFbId5mK0Z4mpJpSZHi4 g2SZ+ccggksJjLeGLgf0fJNduIQ124CX755y6eUsouFZqLsOJZ5AmZSv3QAx8qwa+ZVA A4sg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=+ky/FsBMf+HGOXkgsUDRjtfUVNOS3sFEcCbkAIRcCCc=; b=ZLN+tqu+aRA05QEwpytl2/nQmo106i7s/SxaB+TtUz15FmMaEKxbgsKpm49xZ75fqg 4Ss2fkQHisw1/FZLMTXCFkiaYMWmzqMe8kuvf0AdVM93hE5r22hzBZQgfY+PxD28Myz7 76oU+N/O/cyaVVgpR5L/T3Kgtl92lGaJKctJ9HUxa74B35u7eXygctpP79H3RHLqB6Vm juUlssQjcYHg62f6ge6fisC7ecEoaHjRjgtS+EMA4ZRnRW2SY/uVUy7p+o4OtQlz8JJ3 n99kvkYrGImguwSqXgMS+F1ahiu+njl2aUoL5PP+Bvojy5P2DSsBkzvVtl+UJq698/em vwBw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531ycSQFowBBiw8pCgQQOYMoFpcXTBSnyspA2vA4ZEqy9AWF7aGN KbH1745c2jOUZRpNK2y2/WMXJEQgzfJX8g== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyv6jL39OiLPD9BoO+fHDILzVFWPqlPpQeqV0bZ3JQS73mawOl/Wjo47Ph5K+puJWY++P7ZBA== X-Received: by 2002:adf:9d49:: with SMTP id o9mr3077521wre.413.1606387749977; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 02:49:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from normingtong-a01.lan (2.144.199.146.dyn.plus.net. [146.199.144.2]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id n9sm7791789wmd.4.2020.11.26.02.49.09 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 26 Nov 2020 02:49:09 -0800 (PST) From: Glyn Normington Message-Id: <1D952F64-B7B2-4C57-9479-918908323629@gmail.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_DEC99A9A-AC54-404A-AB32-E27210DEAB13" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\)) Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2020 10:49:08 +0000 In-Reply-To: <89140FFF-6B25-4ABC-8A25-92327B1313F3@gmail.com> Cc: jsonpath@ietf.org To: Daniel P References: <89140FFF-6B25-4ABC-8A25-92327B1313F3@gmail.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] Remarks on the array slice operator described in https://jsonpath-standard.github.io/internet-draft/#name-array-selector-2 X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2020 10:49:13 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_DEC99A9A-AC54-404A-AB32-E27210DEAB13 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 On 26 Nov 2020, at 09:49, Glyn Normington = wrote: >=20 > On 25 Nov 2020, at 22:45, Daniel P > wrote: >>=20 >>> From: Glyn Normington >>> Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] Remarks on the array slice operator = described in = https://jsonpath-standard.github.io/internet-draft/#name-array-selector-2 >>> I took a crack at those editorial changes. Please see: >>>=20 >>> https://github.com/jsonpath-standard/internet-draft/pull/41 >>>=20 >>=20 >> This draft is evolving nicely, in my opinion, I'm certain that = implementators >> will be appreciative of your efforts. I still dislike the use of >> "union element" in the definition of terms like "slice". Comparable >> specifications define "slice" by itself, without reference to where = it >> is used. For that matter, I dislike the term "union", as conceptually >> these cannot sensibly be considered unions in an algebraic sence. I >> prefer the analogous JMESPath nomenclature, "MultiSelect list". >>=20 >> More comments: >>=20 >> (1) "A JSON Path is a", "A JSON Path MUST be" p. 1 >>=20 >> Goessner never uses "JSON Path", Goessner consistently uses JSONPath >=20 > Yes, I know. I don=E2=80=99t mind switching if there=E2=80=99s a = general preference for =E2=80=9CJSONPath=E2=80=9D. > The WG is entitled =E2=80=9CJSON Path=E2=80=9D, so it=E2=80=99s not = obvious what the consensus is. Deferring for the moment. On reflection, switched to JSONPath. Let=E2=80=99s see if there=E2=80=99s = any push-back. >=20 >>=20 >> (2) "A JSON Path is a string which selects zero or more nodes of any >> JSON document" p.1 >>=20 >> "A JSON document is logically a tree of nodes with the document as = the root >> node of the tree." p. 1 >>=20 >> A JSONPath is an expression that when applied against JSON, returns = JSON. >> Why introduce "JSON document" and "node"? RFC8259 makes no mention of >> "JSON document" or "node". Neither does ECMA-404 2nd edition. = Goessner >> refers to "XML documents" and XPath nodes, but not to JSON documents >> or nodes. >=20 > Phrases like =E2=80=9Capplied against JSON=E2=80=9D feel imprecise. A = JSONPath isn=E2=80=99t applied to > the notation per se, but to something written in the notation. >=20 > Perhaps we should simply adopt the language of RFC 8259 and talk about = =E2=80=9Ca JSON text=E2=80=9D > instead of =E2=80=9Ca JSON document=E2=80=9D. Switched to =E2=80=9CJSON text=E2=80=9D.= --Apple-Mail=_DEC99A9A-AC54-404A-AB32-E27210DEAB13 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 On = 26 Nov 2020, at 09:49, Glyn Normington <glyn.normington.work@gmail.com> wrote:

On 25 Nov 2020, at 22:45, Daniel = P <danielaparker@gmail.com> wrote:

From: Glyn Normington <glyn.normington.work@gmail.com>
Subject: = Re: [Jsonpath] Remarks on the array slice operator described in https://jsonpath-standard.github.io/internet-draft/#name-array-= selector-2
I took a crack at those editorial changes. = Please see:

https://github.com/jsonpath-standard/internet-draft/pull/41=


This draft is = evolving nicely, in my opinion, I'm certain that implementators
will be appreciative of your efforts. I still dislike the use = of
"union element" in the definition of terms like = "slice". Comparable
specifications define "slice" by = itself, without reference to where it
is used. For that = matter, I dislike the term "union", as conceptually
these = cannot sensibly be considered unions in an algebraic sence. I
prefer the analogous JMESPath nomenclature, "MultiSelect = list".

More comments:

(1) "A JSON Path is a", "A JSON Path MUST be" p. 1

Goessner never uses "JSON Path", Goessner = consistently uses JSONPath

Yes, I know. I don=E2=80=99t = mind switching if there=E2=80=99s a general preference for = =E2=80=9CJSONPath=E2=80=9D.
The WG is entitled =E2=80=9CJSON Path=E2=80=9D, so it=E2=80=99s= not obvious what the consensus is. Deferring for the moment.

On reflection, = switched to JSONPath. Let=E2=80=99s see if there=E2=80=99s any = push-back.



(2) "A JSON Path is a = string which selects zero or more nodes of any
JSON = document" p.1

"A JSON document is logically = a tree of nodes with the document as the root
node of the = tree." p. 1

A JSONPath is an expression = that when applied against JSON, returns JSON.
Why = introduce "JSON document" and "node"? RFC8259 makes no mention of
"JSON document" or "node". Neither does ECMA-404 2nd edition. = Goessner
refers to "XML documents" and XPath nodes, but = not to JSON documents
or nodes.

Phrases like =E2=80=9Capplied against JSON=E2=80=9D feel = imprecise. A JSONPath isn=E2=80=99t applied to
the notation per se, but to = something written in the notation.

Perhaps we should simply adopt the language of RFC 8259 and = talk about =E2=80=9Ca JSON text=E2=80=9D
instead of =E2=80=9Ca JSON = document=E2=80=9D.

Switched to =E2=80=9CJSON text=E2=80=9D.
= --Apple-Mail=_DEC99A9A-AC54-404A-AB32-E27210DEAB13-- From nobody Thu Nov 26 07:38:56 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF60E3A13FB for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 07:38:54 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id LT4IuShMB_Fg for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 07:38:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wm1-x343.google.com (mail-wm1-x343.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::343]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A116B3A13FA for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 07:38:53 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wm1-x343.google.com with SMTP id 10so2520989wml.2 for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 07:38:53 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=mmO9I3RxqGKEzQwJiV9NWCuGLbAPYdco4cONqhqAPRc=; b=vfaOYCEyNUlDzJrkw4ZiI3Tb6GMI7MV3/s9leKS8hN33XMYn25JYXIk1uJSsdk7bjL 0NviB1l9hRGEBki7cxWU0+jRCCSO3v3wOTiWbWd7Mx02iezDTJN+dfnWx2W6RddKXMGg V1wcBmvUh5Tli5zcscxc2e1nbGuvWWcxdNCTqDmfS+kR9dwLCPAPUU0UrHmLiG4N7dff 49z9FOpC305yNTHUo0RzsgGTV/5y3XCrNb+YCyamQNpThDLWzMbfoc6b+Hw/GAmrJ2CE xXdWSzSUp0RorG3U5Ufr+Aet6XR58QgMRYfF3kJqjxSCPpjGaQ8Eze09CD/g7OahhK3c r3dg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=mmO9I3RxqGKEzQwJiV9NWCuGLbAPYdco4cONqhqAPRc=; b=m64RpN8sQuoR3MBvoCufCu2GCAbZM3dOFCfprXFE86WZSnrQBg23tPSRcJ+EVEECyA RMCgpZ+KJcGSmKnc5IL2cb1GB7aXAlv4az+UVTY82PlphBcMYBYgE/ZBci+mhUIYea7G y6H1WkhLux+wregV3MjRbp+oXqUgjfGVo2HcUkCXbBEHt9j0S4HII4iEOjDWxgDOD9dW xZ+Fhp/pu2uWOwGNNozjWIQn/GzgS1yJQUluRXj6i+VhcTNacrGDG/O9qf5bYD3NJI6b 9/NSm53f4JMTjIMufqBpVGUTzj6UvwC2AtP6apOjpsZAH2qVvtwiC94kfP9geOIf3DOb nKJw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530zIxyxim8kxfZwdIrsu3gUVLHokh9/8tzabEvnzLdv+dcez4OK TUNKAhesGWCfgGEZVJhyx5UDxRmuG2Tmm3SS12M= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwPj1xbzsDZfYomfYRRJw+JAFvE1iwfxHh/ig0d5IWx45nisxI+Xxp4hrAe6yFoE8gG4NnLzudS8Jl0pxy07nI= X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:2314:: with SMTP id 20mr71342wmo.92.1606405132115; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 07:38:52 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <89140FFF-6B25-4ABC-8A25-92327B1313F3@gmail.com> <1D952F64-B7B2-4C57-9479-918908323629@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <1D952F64-B7B2-4C57-9479-918908323629@gmail.com> From: Daniel P Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2020 10:38:40 -0500 Message-ID: To: Glyn Normington Cc: jsonpath@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] Remarks on the array slice operator described in https://jsonpath-standard.github.io/internet-draft/#name-array-selector-2 X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2020 15:38:55 -0000 > On 26 Nov 2020, at 09:49, Glyn Normington wrote: > > On 25 Nov 2020, at 22:45, Daniel P wrote: > > (2) "A JSON Path is a string which selects zero or more nodes of any > JSON document" p.1 > > "A JSON document is logically a tree of nodes with the document as the ro= ot > node of the tree." p. 1 > > A JSONPath is an expression that when applied against JSON, returns JSON. > Why introduce "JSON document" and "node"? RFC8259 makes no mention of > "JSON document" or "node". Neither does ECMA-404 2nd edition. Goessner > refers to "XML documents" and XPath nodes, but not to JSON documents > or nodes. > > > Phrases like =E2=80=9Capplied against JSON=E2=80=9D feel imprecise. A JSO= NPath isn=E2=80=99t applied to > the notation per se, but to something written in the notation. > > Perhaps we should simply adopt the language of RFC 8259 and talk about = =E2=80=9Ca JSON text=E2=80=9D > instead of =E2=80=9Ca JSON document=E2=80=9D. > ECMA-404 2nd edition defines a JSON text as "a sequence of tokens formed fr= om Unicode code points that conforms to the JSON value grammar", and suggests = an abstract understanding of "JSON value", the JSON value grammar is defined without mentioning text. RFC 8259 is less clear, it describes a JSON text a= s "a serialized value", but then in the grammar defines JSON-text =3D ws value ws Given that the input and output to a JSONPath search function is rarely literally text, I'd personally be inclined to "JSON value" with reference to ECMA-404 2nd edition. But that's just me, I'm certain that others here can comment on this more authoritatively. Daniel From nobody Thu Nov 26 07:47:53 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8FD2A3A142A for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 07:47:52 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.919 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.919 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id j0oNAUW77mkE for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 07:47:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 73C5A3A1421 for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 07:47:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.217.120] (p548dce71.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.141.206.113]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4Chhwg5R4LzyWC; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 16:47:47 +0100 (CET) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\)) From: Carsten Bormann In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2020 16:47:47 +0100 Cc: Glyn Normington , jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 628098467.274516-9e38d36c12b47d084a9586207478b19d Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <49920A2E-455D-4DD0-9F87-4E88432BC04D@tzi.org> References: <89140FFF-6B25-4ABC-8A25-92327B1313F3@gmail.com> <1D952F64-B7B2-4C57-9479-918908323629@gmail.com> To: Daniel P X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] Remarks on the array slice operator described in https://jsonpath-standard.github.io/internet-draft/#name-array-selector-2 X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2020 15:47:53 -0000 >>=20 >> Perhaps we should simply adopt the language of RFC 8259 and talk = about =E2=80=9Ca JSON text=E2=80=9D >> instead of =E2=80=9Ca JSON document=E2=80=9D. >>=20 > ECMA-404 2nd edition defines a JSON text as "a sequence of tokens = formed from > Unicode code points that conforms to the JSON value grammar", and = suggests an > abstract understanding of "JSON value", the JSON value grammar is = defined > without mentioning text. RFC 8259 is less clear, it describes a JSON = text as > "a serialized value=E2=80=9D, Exactly that. =E2=80=9CJSON text=E2=80=9D is the encoded data item, = which is not what JSONpath operates on. The actual data item encoded by = the JSON text is not discussed in ECMA-404 (which would make this a = useless document if there weren=E2=80=99t others around that point the = way). =E2=80=9CJSON value=E2=80=9D is an acceptable way to talk about = the JSON data item, so if congruence with RFC 8259 is desirable, this = should be the way to go. (The end of the examples section uses =E2=80=9Conly values=E2=80=9D as = =E2=80=9Conly atomic values=E2=80=9D, but I think we can ignore this = lapse =E2=80=94 RFC 8259 is the result of a rather tortuous process = where editorial consistency wasn=E2=80=99t always the main objective.) > but then in the grammar defines >=20 > JSON-text =3D ws value ws Yes, because in the grammar, each of the productions (value, object, = array, string=E2=80=A6) define the representation of the data item that = is named in its name; so the production =E2=80=9Cvalue=E2=80=9D defines = how to represent a =E2=80=9CJSON value=E2=80=9D. This is fully consistent. > Given that the input and output to a JSONPath search function is > rarely literally text, Exactly. > I'd personally be inclined to "JSON value" with reference to ECMA-404 > 2nd edition. But that's just me, I'm certain that others here can > comment on this > more authoritatively. If there were no precedence, I=E2=80=99d use =E2=80=9CJSON data item=E2=80= =9D, but =E2=80=9CJSON value=E2=80=9D works. (Unfortunately, following RFC 8259 also imports =E2=80=9Cobject=E2=80=9D, = which I think we should never use without the =E2=80=9CJSON=E2=80=9D = prefix.) Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten From nobody Thu Nov 26 07:54:35 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 084653A1462 for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 07:54:30 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QMHFepninSBq for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 07:54:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wm1-x331.google.com (mail-wm1-x331.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::331]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 509AF3A145C for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 07:54:28 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wm1-x331.google.com with SMTP id a3so2852199wmb.5 for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 07:54:28 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=tdcWtOuxNVpa8YNVdxdJPHMX5n6IvyZB/RU/FXLF6xE=; b=EeTpglWjG6YZ8AVEPZ0mC9BF/EC0t+ND07JQts2x4Qx+RDEjm2MKmPVRPyGTMRwFkA UWG4ztZsvAMDcndVjNLTRdNXcA1iMFUU63vI3ld6zVa5+lzhUcfcUX7RjcyxT8iestKI osXgUAq5VGz5rfELXMsq4DQTO5UDidNZbeE5GBy9V1mwi9f48J2B56aChoFtwokvdVP9 iiIDf+rPjbB3pD5ysEp9dgvijdBr4m+sHjm5oNrznuSq3p3GNIIenZYIZRqB7nbkRekJ tu4JC+6sl+Fw1Q2PaG1hjI4BVSS6csL4vGJpyQPXsRlqk99Z3HXLobgoHgvfw0rgCqoL VJpw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=tdcWtOuxNVpa8YNVdxdJPHMX5n6IvyZB/RU/FXLF6xE=; b=E8A015ssJQ4tGaxzqwQH35bkFZNbhD2Q6Y3woXiSqSTt4AAZ79jqaIGe/BOx/+Boza h2T+3k7rO6iBa9/YCxyuRaQ2sUw7PXsTfDzgCJ4N0qKgKeUxp7V8AfXbB0aTj3Aw0PJ/ +f8uEUSElhsJy5CSDM7Evivl6bNhzlCae96qQrPfA+Qy7QepPCJQUyf1vRuQOPv0J7w+ dDAtCesaq6ldWFDQkvXkxcKUZtm1rSwsIMm8nPfIA7JPr70by8BQ4hLywKyb0UB/Mxnu Rzq7+b6US3Xj0Yi/95n6nBMjb/guqQu/Cv9eHCv2ZmeZMuqXo//YwETYS8SWzXKvzePn JEkQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533HiD36v2Hr4wCmNDFAoxt6VROMbL+x/9e7yTspFRT5oEbMrnsv seAxSV7d7itE7T1pK0zc7Kk= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxySxBCmAtXx/Y1afsN94v/6C2cPfbJI19SL4gE18qlPyRVYj8iQA7FMflPVVNH6NqmA0NctQ== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:6002:: with SMTP id u2mr4064041wmb.29.1606406066688; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 07:54:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.97] (2.144.199.146.dyn.plus.net. [146.199.144.2]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id e27sm11104493wrc.9.2020.11.26.07.54.25 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 26 Nov 2020 07:54:26 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\)) From: Glyn Normington In-Reply-To: <49920A2E-455D-4DD0-9F87-4E88432BC04D@tzi.org> Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2020 15:54:25 +0000 Cc: Daniel P , jsonpath@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <7462BFDA-0BEE-4345-8155-1E7980D0C10E@gmail.com> References: <89140FFF-6B25-4ABC-8A25-92327B1313F3@gmail.com> <1D952F64-B7B2-4C57-9479-918908323629@gmail.com> <49920A2E-455D-4DD0-9F87-4E88432BC04D@tzi.org> To: Carsten Bormann X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] Remarks on the array slice operator described in https://jsonpath-standard.github.io/internet-draft/#name-array-selector-2 X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2020 15:54:33 -0000 On 26 Nov 2020, at 15:47, Carsten Bormann wrote: >=20 >>>=20 >>> Perhaps we should simply adopt the language of RFC 8259 and talk = about =E2=80=9Ca JSON text=E2=80=9D >>> instead of =E2=80=9Ca JSON document=E2=80=9D. >>>=20 >> ECMA-404 2nd edition defines a JSON text as "a sequence of tokens = formed from >> Unicode code points that conforms to the JSON value grammar", and = suggests an >> abstract understanding of "JSON value", the JSON value grammar is = defined >> without mentioning text. RFC 8259 is less clear, it describes a JSON = text as >> "a serialized value=E2=80=9D, >=20 > Exactly that. =E2=80=9CJSON text=E2=80=9D is the encoded data item, = which is not what JSONpath operates on. The actual data item encoded by = the JSON text is not discussed in ECMA-404 (which would make this a = useless document if there weren=E2=80=99t others around that point the = way). =E2=80=9CJSON value=E2=80=9D is an acceptable way to talk about = the JSON data item, so if congruence with RFC 8259 is desirable, this = should be the way to go. > (The end of the examples section uses =E2=80=9Conly values=E2=80=9D as = =E2=80=9Conly atomic values=E2=80=9D, but I think we can ignore this = lapse =E2=80=94 RFC 8259 is the result of a rather tortuous process = where editorial consistency wasn=E2=80=99t always the main objective.) >=20 >> but then in the grammar defines >>=20 >> JSON-text =3D ws value ws >=20 > Yes, because in the grammar, each of the productions (value, object, = array, string=E2=80=A6) define the representation of the data item that = is named in its name; so the production =E2=80=9Cvalue=E2=80=9D defines = how to represent a =E2=80=9CJSON value=E2=80=9D. > This is fully consistent. >=20 >> Given that the input and output to a JSONPath search function is >> rarely literally text, >=20 > Exactly. >=20 >> I'd personally be inclined to "JSON value" with reference to = ECMA-404 >> 2nd edition. But that's just me, I'm certain that others here can >> comment on this >> more authoritatively. >=20 > If there were no precedence, I=E2=80=99d use =E2=80=9CJSON data = item=E2=80=9D, but =E2=80=9CJSON value=E2=80=9D works. > (Unfortunately, following RFC 8259 also imports =E2=80=9Cobject=E2=80=9D= , which I think we should never use without the =E2=80=9CJSON=E2=80=9D = prefix.) Ok, I've switched from =E2=80=9CJSON text=E2=80=9D to =E2=80=9CJSON = value=E2=80=9D in the PR. >=20 > Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten >=20 From nobody Thu Nov 26 08:03:11 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3515C3A1446 for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 08:03:10 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.919 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.919 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0BJ4l5uUm67e for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 08:03:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2FDF53A1110 for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 08:03:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.217.120] (p548dce71.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.141.206.113]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4ChjGK2XjyzyVk; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 17:03:05 +0100 (CET) From: Carsten Bormann Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 628099384.880282-eb024d9b6c45c6e14bc2e573edaaaeca Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\)) Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2020 17:03:04 +0100 Message-Id: <0C9AFBC5-491A-4433-86A7-CCF68DF83A59@tzi.org> To: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4) Archived-At: Subject: [Jsonpath] Title of the specification X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2020 16:03:10 -0000 The draft at https://github.com/jsonpath-standard/internet-draft = currently uses the title: JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Path The draft at https://github.com/jsonpath-wg/draft-goessner-jsonpath = uses: JSONPath =E2=80=94 XPath for JSON I think we have discussed here that we don=E2=80=99t want to emphasize = XPath in the title any more. The former title evokes JavaScript in a needless attempt to expand the = JSON acronym. The RFC editor has decided that this is not needed for = JSON (see the =E2=80=9C*=E2=80=9D in [1]); I believe that this expansion = is detrimental as JSONPath is neither limited to nor even focused on = JavaScript. So this would turn it into=20 JSON Path which we don=E2=80=99t like, so it becomes JSONPath which is a bit terse. So I=E2=80=99d propose to add the purpose in the title: JSONPath: A query language for JSON values or maybe a bit more understandable: JSONPath: A query language for JSON data values We can also discuss =E2=80=9Clanguage=E2=80=9D, which I=E2=80=99m happy = with, but might trigger associations with long-form languages = (COBOL=E2=80=A6). Hmm. Maybe: JSONPath: A concise query language for JSON data values (Use title case here, of course, I=E2=80=99ll leave that to the = natives.) Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten [1]: https://www.rfc-editor.org/materials/abbrev.expansion.txt From nobody Thu Nov 26 08:31:13 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5549C3A12D1 for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 08:31:12 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.097 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7AeZzl_-Su1n for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 08:31:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-io1-xd34.google.com (mail-io1-xd34.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d34]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 53D413A1482 for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 08:31:10 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-io1-xd34.google.com with SMTP id i9so2296211ioo.2 for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 08:31:10 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=dmWq7aNpaau9D5Vc2/LveLXDERwG3DHqWmjoKaYjmlk=; b=aBMKnipbp0f0QriICt/nXkZkS/tPTWHlTWDUHuphI52n173fBKlOEqwF5iifUYUJtc T8bJGQBc8rUEF1Xo8rliRQou4Zj30IIHU1FofUHrLL24sdHC5wiGp+pf2YG2GxMhHHJL Hipidjhc8C4moo6FnsyzIWtDOaG5o1kLV975fBtu0QGsndicFUIk2GZC17ENiVob2YPC Ji1z/2JM+tllzH8GaQwHLhXvrHnnKa40eLgwNhw0VNuew/df35Y6kmvoMThEPfzmPyQd Rfa4ghEIAQwB7Oal6J1I6adSNP2KSdCzAeLi/jtzsvW8+IPL6UH+uoxiMWktuh+qAjN3 l4Rg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=dmWq7aNpaau9D5Vc2/LveLXDERwG3DHqWmjoKaYjmlk=; b=NS0fhWdEFT0wmQ+uBQITS6a5bZ2o+Q52/bAU+de+lY53G5T6dG/JYgkXnF8UsWZ2Cz WDfjQ9qyjwyM/8Espv2i9D62zLpHQCNet2SHjy2b7m8VGy/SnCO/uNQxhnaWPrjPKXve 6ilKyoJf2CY1E0m3lxsIeUGUAeojVyPxdtbwLL9Kk6iZg1byRgwPpZuASMsPkQYGKLwh AEUkYxnnaa8wjypmQInc9ktkb2aVmp9qHn6M4wrVZBmG0e5NDsP1Fb7cGulwLJvGp2fz Ghp2tNOiawlZOqjDXk6UJhppOlOO40Yjx2GZE96FvrDWF1LMWLzMjZOHLJf+i2ofof/Y 4BjQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530ZQOmBSESABYmV2o99ne81lAfjtyTj1Uh6NwA/9iLA43Y5blpv S9f6X95AlpAcDCeOeSX1vGZNY8fenDFs5jEENxE= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyMJLRxqDdtYgGshvWm/rOA4mBYEBkmP4I4J69BM6kpwz9IaZwpvedW6W/DdnlycA6G4rRRGZCytYgXOHbb8fQ= X-Received: by 2002:a6b:d10f:: with SMTP id l15mr2823311iob.43.1606408269600; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 08:31:09 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <0C9AFBC5-491A-4433-86A7-CCF68DF83A59@tzi.org> In-Reply-To: <0C9AFBC5-491A-4433-86A7-CCF68DF83A59@tzi.org> From: Alan Painter Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2020 17:31:07 +0100 Message-ID: To: Carsten Bormann Cc: jsonpath@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000461ffd05b5051204" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] Title of the specification X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2020 16:31:12 -0000 --000000000000461ffd05b5051204 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Just a few off-the-cuff thoughts: a. Is there any distinction between "JSON data" and "JSON" itself? Could this be simply "A language for querying JSON" ? b. Does "concise" add anything? Makes the title less concise. On Thu, Nov 26, 2020, 17:03 Carsten Bormann wrote: > The draft at https://github.com/jsonpath-standard/internet-draft > currently uses the title: > > JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Path > > The draft at https://github.com/jsonpath-wg/draft-goessner-jsonpath uses: > > JSONPath =E2=80=94 XPath for JSON > > I think we have discussed here that we don=E2=80=99t want to emphasize XP= ath in > the title any more. > > The former title evokes JavaScript in a needless attempt to expand the > JSON acronym. The RFC editor has decided that this is not needed for JSO= N > (see the =E2=80=9C*=E2=80=9D in [1]); I believe that this expansion is de= trimental as > JSONPath is neither limited to nor even focused on JavaScript. > > So this would turn it into > > JSON Path > > which we don=E2=80=99t like, so it becomes > > JSONPath > > which is a bit terse. > > So I=E2=80=99d propose to add the purpose in the title: > > JSONPath: A query language for JSON values > > or maybe a bit more understandable: > > JSONPath: A query language for JSON data values > > We can also discuss =E2=80=9Clanguage=E2=80=9D, which I=E2=80=99m happy w= ith, but might trigger > associations with long-form languages (COBOL=E2=80=A6). Hmm. Maybe: > > JSONPath: A concise query language for JSON data values > > (Use title case here, of course, I=E2=80=99ll leave that to the natives.) > > Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten > > [1]: https://www.rfc-editor.org/materials/abbrev.expansion.txt > > -- > Jsonpath mailing list > Jsonpath@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonpath > --000000000000461ffd05b5051204 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Just a few off-the-cuff thoughts:

a.=C2= =A0 Is there any distinction between "JSON data" and "JSON&q= uot; itself?=C2=A0 Could this be simply "A language for querying JSON&= quot; ?
b.=C2=A0 Does "concise" add anything?=C2=A0 Mak= es the title less concise.



On Thu, Nov 26, 2020, 17:03 Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> wrote:
The draft at https://github.com/jsonpath-standard/internet-draft currently uses the title:

JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Path

The draft at https://github.com/jso= npath-wg/draft-goessner-jsonpath uses:

JSONPath =E2=80=94 XPath for JSON

I think we have discussed here that we don=E2=80=99t want to emphasize XPat= h in the title any more.

The former title evokes JavaScript in a needless attempt to expand the JSON= acronym.=C2=A0 The RFC editor has decided that this is not needed for JSON= (see the =E2=80=9C*=E2=80=9D in [1]); I believe that this expansion is det= rimental as JSONPath is neither limited to nor even focused on JavaScript.<= br>
So this would turn it into

JSON Path

which we don=E2=80=99t like, so it becomes

JSONPath

which is a bit terse.

So I=E2=80=99d propose to add the purpose in the title:

JSONPath: A query language for JSON values

or maybe a bit more understandable:

JSONPath: A query language for JSON data values

We can also discuss =E2=80=9Clanguage=E2=80=9D, which I=E2=80=99m happy wit= h, but might trigger associations with long-form languages (COBOL=E2=80=A6)= .=C2=A0 Hmm.=C2=A0 Maybe:

JSONPath: A concise query language for JSON data values

(Use title case here, of course, I=E2=80=99ll leave that to the natives.)
Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten

[1]: https://www.rfc-editor.org/= materials/abbrev.expansion.txt

--
Jsonpath mailing list
J= sonpath@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonp= ath
--000000000000461ffd05b5051204-- From nobody Thu Nov 26 08:40:56 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42E513A14B3 for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 08:40:55 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.097 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id erVn5XB57Nl1 for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 08:40:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wm1-x32f.google.com (mail-wm1-x32f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::32f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C1F783A1535 for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 08:40:36 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wm1-x32f.google.com with SMTP id 1so3003854wme.3 for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 08:40:36 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=Kj9Ar6y0fCtrrMTNHuqCVh1zXvxgEDtuAvEJpk2LF54=; b=CHG7jaHnp7R9cxtpEVZ/CaUFwBx3SVdq0RiCBmAxL1YmyyUe3F4UH6ZMcNn7yMQbe8 KuOIAzFRJcpVBo5AGZOxDtQOEkld9VpIpRvFxS+vHwMgg4wUoMtl0XVR5ABPv+b4zLGV Rx7e7ok9nKp4eqy48ydAtZdrf+hsDNcCkI0/Lxi2pmesoQNMb0QN3tvkjXGkraqYsNIK VDKgtIF+gn7uqVw553KHgO82w/QeDlJ85TGC1RlyS90K4caPMHf3RECPmqQrKILIGqvV yyXpCAkAdb1mPTWNRPGQ3CEW8KMb9oKo/32GhKqubH7Y3WIs1KFrVOV8Tnf/IP5d+2Sx Ak6w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=Kj9Ar6y0fCtrrMTNHuqCVh1zXvxgEDtuAvEJpk2LF54=; b=e0U3GwDDmQ2mXsxa8y8J6HEGHJo1JJGOZQTY/CcCtdJkmZ1c3qkpw4tZPPtOl06SYA FbHDP8WCFiuSsYChsLT8B7MTYGaP2R3+uQcz8Q75ZdrZ9KvzU8ISj2TCqsfDDdBDNM80 CXuOOGklVbUR57UbzTOYYZQWutPukI3EvwYCJDitrnL0cI2G5loPiEWzMmeEnklQ6H5I UhrY/zuKnTvEptcEh8O37ae/xJuOEj5xI/mBgAEjxPE+bv+eEqlmwSyDSwQXfOjWk4AO XkYu+qbtKyuVS8hFHO5LttBQ72Ild0voOCngwID3ypFoQrsbwHkQeZgR081QoBmD30s8 Y2sw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533yXoXaCANTgsMvHqOudUrN+MeajCBw9goincsnLZgiAnyrQrpd W4zZeOsGy3WWaaTSX3dL9VWn1bwuTby9Zg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwNWMffXVLRBH6ROMxWl0haSCz/Xy1h8yeZzEVenoqUYpis80W1zEqeBsgv1Kvmgbw6gB8Gpg== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:e0c3:: with SMTP id x186mr4314201wmg.64.1606408835325; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 08:40:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.97] (2.144.199.146.dyn.plus.net. [146.199.144.2]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id q12sm9222940wmc.45.2020.11.26.08.40.34 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 26 Nov 2020 08:40:34 -0800 (PST) From: Glyn Normington Message-Id: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_FB65DA25-FEA0-45D8-A381-FF97FB5B7DC7" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\)) Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2020 16:40:33 +0000 In-Reply-To: Cc: Carsten Bormann , jsonpath@ietf.org To: Alan Painter References: <0C9AFBC5-491A-4433-86A7-CCF68DF83A59@tzi.org> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] Title of the specification X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2020 16:40:55 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_FB65DA25-FEA0-45D8-A381-FF97FB5B7DC7 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > On 26 Nov 2020, at 16:31, Alan Painter wrote: >=20 > Just a few off-the-cuff thoughts: >=20 > a. Is there any distinction between "JSON data" and "JSON" itself? Yes, I believe so. The former refers to a piece of data, but the latter = refers to a notation. The distinction is significant when we want to be = precise. > Could this be simply "A language for querying JSON" ? I think that's fine in the title where concision trumps precision. > b. Does "concise" add anything? Makes the title less concise. >=20 >=20 >=20 > On Thu, Nov 26, 2020, 17:03 Carsten Bormann > wrote: > The draft at https://github.com/jsonpath-standard/internet-draft = currently uses the = title: >=20 > JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Path >=20 > The draft at https://github.com/jsonpath-wg/draft-goessner-jsonpath = uses: >=20 > JSONPath =E2=80=94 XPath for JSON >=20 > I think we have discussed here that we don=E2=80=99t want to emphasize = XPath in the title any more. >=20 > The former title evokes JavaScript in a needless attempt to expand the = JSON acronym. The RFC editor has decided that this is not needed for = JSON (see the =E2=80=9C*=E2=80=9D in [1]); I believe that this expansion = is detrimental as JSONPath is neither limited to nor even focused on = JavaScript. >=20 > So this would turn it into=20 >=20 > JSON Path >=20 > which we don=E2=80=99t like, so it becomes >=20 > JSONPath >=20 > which is a bit terse. >=20 > So I=E2=80=99d propose to add the purpose in the title: >=20 > JSONPath: A query language for JSON values >=20 > or maybe a bit more understandable: >=20 > JSONPath: A query language for JSON data values >=20 > We can also discuss =E2=80=9Clanguage=E2=80=9D, which I=E2=80=99m = happy with, but might trigger associations with long-form languages = (COBOL=E2=80=A6). Hmm. Maybe: >=20 > JSONPath: A concise query language for JSON data values >=20 > (Use title case here, of course, I=E2=80=99ll leave that to the = natives.) >=20 > Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten >=20 > [1]: https://www.rfc-editor.org/materials/abbrev.expansion.txt = >=20 > --=20 > Jsonpath mailing list > Jsonpath@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonpath = > --=20 > Jsonpath mailing list > Jsonpath@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonpath --Apple-Mail=_FB65DA25-FEA0-45D8-A381-FF97FB5B7DC7 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
On = 26 Nov 2020, at 16:31, Alan Painter <alan.painter@gmail.com> wrote:

Just a few off-the-cuff thoughts:

a.  Is there any distinction = between "JSON data" and "JSON" = itself?

Yes, I = believe so. The former refers to a piece of data, but the latter refers = to a notation. The distinction is significant when we want to be = precise.

= Could this be simply "A language for querying JSON" = ?

I think that's = fine in the title where concision trumps precision.

b.  Does "concise" add = anything?  Makes the title less concise.



On Thu, Nov = 26, 2020, 17:03 Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> wrote:
The draft at https://github.com/jsonpath-standard/internet-draft = currently uses the title:

JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Path

The draft at https://github.com/jsonpath-wg/draft-goessner-jsonpath = uses:

JSONPath =E2=80=94 XPath for JSON

I think we have discussed here that we don=E2=80=99t want to emphasize = XPath in the title any more.

The former title evokes JavaScript in a needless attempt to expand the = JSON acronym.  The RFC editor has decided that this is not needed = for JSON (see the =E2=80=9C*=E2=80=9D in [1]); I believe that this = expansion is detrimental as JSONPath is neither limited to nor even = focused on JavaScript.

So this would turn it into

JSON Path

which we don=E2=80=99t like, so it becomes

JSONPath

which is a bit terse.

So I=E2=80=99d propose to add the purpose in the title:

JSONPath: A query language for JSON values

or maybe a bit more understandable:

JSONPath: A query language for JSON data values

We can also discuss =E2=80=9Clanguage=E2=80=9D, which I=E2=80=99m happy = with, but might trigger associations with long-form languages = (COBOL=E2=80=A6).  Hmm.  Maybe:

JSONPath: A concise query language for JSON data values

(Use title case here, of course, I=E2=80=99ll leave that to the = natives.)

Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten

[1]: https://www.rfc-editor.org/materials/abbrev.expansion.txt
--
Jsonpath mailing list
Jsonpath@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonpath
--
Jsonpath mailing list
Jsonpath@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonpath

= --Apple-Mail=_FB65DA25-FEA0-45D8-A381-FF97FB5B7DC7-- From nobody Thu Nov 26 08:50:15 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A04443A14C7 for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 08:50:13 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.92 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.92 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9rOds8teDI6t for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 08:50:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 609E43A14C4 for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 08:50:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.217.120] (p548dce71.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.141.206.113]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4ChkJd4RjnzyVd; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 17:50:09 +0100 (CET) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\)) From: Carsten Bormann In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2020 17:50:09 +0100 Cc: Alan Painter , jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 628102209.154052-b6df290f2f9f09fb2ad12c26693a1907 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <0C9AFBC5-491A-4433-86A7-CCF68DF83A59@tzi.org> To: Glyn Normington X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] Title of the specification X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2020 16:50:14 -0000 > On 2020-11-26, at 17:40, Glyn Normington = wrote: >=20 >=20 >> On 26 Nov 2020, at 16:31, Alan Painter = wrote: >>=20 >> Just a few off-the-cuff thoughts: >>=20 >> a. Is there any distinction between "JSON data" and "JSON" itself? >=20 > Yes, I believe so. The former refers to a piece of data, but the = latter refers to a notation. The distinction is significant when we want = to be precise. >=20 >> Could this be simply "A language for querying JSON" ? >=20 > I think that's fine in the title where concision trumps precision. Well, the title needs to be useful for a much wider audience than the = rest of the document. This is the first step for someone to decide = whether to go on reading the abstract and then the document. For most of us here =E2=80=9CJSON=E2=80=9D is acceptable vernacular for = =E2=80=9CJSON data item=E2=80=9D. =E2=80=9CGive me a JSON for that.=E2=80=9D, hmm. But for many people that use JSON only packaged into some products, that = would be weird. I think that expressing that we are reaching into those data values is = worth adding a word or two. If pointing out the conciseness is less important than conciseness of = the title, I would probably compromise at JSONPath: A query language for JSON data (The =E2=80=9Cvalues=E2=80=9D addition really doesn=E2=80=99t add much.) (I=E2=80=99m also assuming we keep the studlycaps, as XPath did.) Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten From nobody Thu Nov 26 08:52:47 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3F493A14D9 for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 08:52:45 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.097 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MZxhKoCkK6VE for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 08:52:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wr1-x430.google.com (mail-wr1-x430.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::430]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E90A23A14D5 for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 08:52:43 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wr1-x430.google.com with SMTP id z7so2840570wrn.3 for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 08:52:43 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=H+yIJ0DPzjDDaUq8TK1hkvpcvx4ky8RQ5y4RYq/3nb0=; b=X2JknFcZV1QmbsZXQF9uHRV8qLhgBk+DAIUdg2B5D9QKEtF9OY7ZP4rF4PrQxsO3q1 J0GMZwKlVUQQGNWlZM/019HcQko2HPh/AbN2rt0ptwmTBuXRrPV2nuct8G/UDUp6AGdj kzFfSJUoJo52vApFY2/R9s36RSrh4GxLy7n7N89g5HGt9ZlrutmqHmxlSvFnzXbfwDtP Sl6QuoabZoctectEr/1kytZOXJD1WnLwOUnR4H8lgyX2dTVzT8aatHW2rbzKFi51uj/2 5xwIXpqSA1g+XdV35E81Gy/R4Y3TvHhq88TPnVIrUxfSqqA4+hRcaqzc1PtKbN0ldbYZ xJrQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=H+yIJ0DPzjDDaUq8TK1hkvpcvx4ky8RQ5y4RYq/3nb0=; b=pmGKWDD4B/opNsCG9dO2zOKsbWyvtUMuwQuZmNlgNraqAoCaGpqw3m5jAYDkGAJIxc HfW0odfe7KBgZ1VxgPzw46pS/rXMpNps2wfoIEEVzlnGRn57Rya0pDh4zZTyYPAOC2PQ BQPT7oylacUvKqGlziGmJndCL3axLRcEmCTJoJvLwQD7jOhJkWAqLo8qai55RSxBwKp4 06Jyb3TYp7dWJD8408hToodxeetxe4zjP40ERZ8Ph07dsDQshatsNUwUvnBwnDnUJXvW IebJMimRhG6dT5gGS6dXTBrLwtvSNDehyQbWp+KZQn6sW5TPzI+NWEtqH7rVXispMknw dm1A== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532qjbLsNEhlpQRXXpKqGCE0jUNQy6Hj5CNQECHSopdBXOArQ5wt qjOSERcDAvucqJN2NPrOBDA= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwjasae/+q9NA0Dh+DNItQM9V/QdHFJT+KgFh8K2F36UjSMsOyyKXIpipmTCImsbj0zex9bQQ== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6000:1088:: with SMTP id y8mr5015820wrw.207.1606409562320; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 08:52:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.97] (2.144.199.146.dyn.plus.net. [146.199.144.2]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b73sm9532114wmb.0.2020.11.26.08.52.41 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 26 Nov 2020 08:52:41 -0800 (PST) From: Glyn Normington Message-Id: <8DFB26D6-42FD-4215-9A7C-D10D28729224@gmail.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_48E9E6DE-3CC8-470D-AFDD-66017C406759" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\)) Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2020 16:52:40 +0000 In-Reply-To: Cc: Alan Painter , jsonpath@ietf.org To: Carsten Bormann References: <0C9AFBC5-491A-4433-86A7-CCF68DF83A59@tzi.org> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] Title of the specification X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2020 16:52:46 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_48E9E6DE-3CC8-470D-AFDD-66017C406759 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > On 26 Nov 2020, at 16:50, Carsten Bormann wrote: >=20 >=20 >=20 >> On 2020-11-26, at 17:40, Glyn Normington = wrote: >>=20 >>=20 >>> On 26 Nov 2020, at 16:31, Alan Painter = wrote: >>>=20 >>> Just a few off-the-cuff thoughts: >>>=20 >>> a. Is there any distinction between "JSON data" and "JSON" itself? >>=20 >> Yes, I believe so. The former refers to a piece of data, but the = latter refers to a notation. The distinction is significant when we want = to be precise. >>=20 >>> Could this be simply "A language for querying JSON" ? >>=20 >> I think that's fine in the title where concision trumps precision. >=20 > Well, the title needs to be useful for a much wider audience than the = rest of the document. This is the first step for someone to decide = whether to go on reading the abstract and then the document. >=20 > For most of us here =E2=80=9CJSON=E2=80=9D is acceptable vernacular = for =E2=80=9CJSON data item=E2=80=9D. > =E2=80=9CGive me a JSON for that.=E2=80=9D, hmm. > But for many people that use JSON only packaged into some products, = that would be weird. >=20 > I think that expressing that we are reaching into those data values is = worth adding a word or two. >=20 > If pointing out the conciseness is less important than conciseness of = the title, I would probably compromise at >=20 > JSONPath: A query language for JSON data +1 >=20 > (The =E2=80=9Cvalues=E2=80=9D addition really doesn=E2=80=99t add = much.) >=20 > (I=E2=80=99m also assuming we keep the studlycaps, as XPath did.) >=20 > Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten --Apple-Mail=_48E9E6DE-3CC8-470D-AFDD-66017C406759 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8

On 26 Nov 2020, at 16:50, Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> = wrote:



On = 2020-11-26, at 17:40, Glyn Normington <glyn.normington.work@gmail.com> wrote:

On 26 = Nov 2020, at 16:31, Alan Painter <alan.painter@gmail.com> wrote:

Just a few off-the-cuff thoughts:

a.  Is there any distinction between "JSON data" and = "JSON" itself?

Yes, I believe = so. The former refers to a piece of data, but the latter refers to a = notation. The distinction is significant when we want to be precise.

Could = this be simply "A language for querying JSON" ?

I think that's fine in the title = where concision trumps precision.

Well, the title needs to be = useful for a much wider audience than the rest of the document. =  This is the first step for someone to decide whether to go on = reading the abstract and then the document.

For most of us here =E2=80=9CJSON=E2= =80=9D is acceptable vernacular for =E2=80=9CJSON data = item=E2=80=9D.
=E2=80=9CGive me a JSON for that.=E2=80=9D, hmm.
But for many people that use = JSON only packaged into some products, that would be weird.

I think that expressing that we = are reaching into those data values is worth adding a word or = two.

If pointing = out the conciseness is less important than conciseness of the title, I = would probably compromise at

JSONPath: A query language for JSON data

+1


(The =E2=80=9Cvalues=E2=80=9D = addition really doesn=E2=80=99t add much.)

(I=E2=80=99m also assuming we keep the studlycaps, as XPath = did.)

Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe= , Carsten

= --Apple-Mail=_48E9E6DE-3CC8-470D-AFDD-66017C406759-- From nobody Thu Nov 26 09:06:14 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E83D43A14D7 for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 09:06:12 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.898 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=textuality-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cQu4SWX_CKtc for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 09:06:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-lj1-x229.google.com (mail-lj1-x229.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::229]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 87AE83A11A2 for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 09:06:09 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-lj1-x229.google.com with SMTP id z1so3083046ljn.4 for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 09:06:09 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=textuality-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=o4RPY6bC3OMAWr5xzYkbEKUheQGreTkvEzwuVoUwe2M=; b=h4aCAKWc7mQVsP26B2MBTQlBAWovm+eLIcXKgZB2TDJGVEOsmUcEA2xepwJ1WVs+yl D7NY/W7gWAAQEQV4LycBXoN/YjxAqFkToFky/hI1gfVkz0Ta+3bxX6eVtWcTKlcAq1ne /vVhG0m+yRwNByWTaNlvf/C5eGNT702AZrVD6jg9A8wJkzV7cl+2xM2RcCdK2ZWcvln9 7CIDegAtRbbm/Ym+6UtO6d6Om1jw1wEVOOA+sJyRF/YuG4LKmfoeDTpAnTNpgXvhSaZC idHK+NUkuwQNIMcR+TKxyeJSQo+NmbCOmHOcPykVtvTgtKylGzNloTQme4mJjFiWjoEJ KxUQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=o4RPY6bC3OMAWr5xzYkbEKUheQGreTkvEzwuVoUwe2M=; b=kMc+d1MuKoer48jY4AgED2dAEU+KpdqQTt5FR3PyBLKikvaN2iifoV11GOdFEDHzge k1i42igHFrocX62KsKBtCVME9GORuo2ntiiYHxtsUr1ZJdNMU2Ro8zxwFdA0AzOYdpu4 N/kGUPFUFcDby7pQiSL3EiPaWEbyAphllPlqtN3j5NCxErJqY2U195IQhHB/jNpm7aGe 4W7toG2omstbUf8/iBjWdwBMTxT1l8ojtWNKK18+JJeNNuPcisy7s9JpuYS7Cam1H/6L eorREfq/DQlse0vwRQYF+cmETV9MG2VrPyKhV5wxKAQkss4YJHa2CY1xZDBBuv/jN89v 1GTw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531A6tV1l4qP6I7z1jN7AP+rYW6c9ITPKK/YZfHgphGw8qlCyh5j nD5OvPAYnMGR4dUmQzVrWfRx/++nERCDl7g+8uMrWA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxgcg78TJLbUCY8INsFDvWGOgxaCdlei5+GuKRl0s7TXUxT8tBkL0O62hd4HwOl/LmCHYX3T+VFlZRUWwQdYws= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:2c14:: with SMTP id s20mr1591745ljs.398.1606410366585; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 09:06:06 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <0C9AFBC5-491A-4433-86A7-CCF68DF83A59@tzi.org> <8DFB26D6-42FD-4215-9A7C-D10D28729224@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <8DFB26D6-42FD-4215-9A7C-D10D28729224@gmail.com> From: Tim Bray Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2020 09:05:55 -0800 Message-ID: To: Glyn Normington Cc: Carsten Bormann , jsonpath@ietf.org, Alan Painter Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000043cfa105b5058faf" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] Title of the specification X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2020 17:06:13 -0000 --00000000000043cfa105b5058faf Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I think I=E2=80=99d slightly prefer the term =E2=80=9Csyntax=E2=80=9D to = =E2=80=9Clanguage=E2=80=9D because =E2=80=9Cquery language=E2=80=9D has a smell of various things that end with the letters = =E2=80=9CQ=E2=80=9D and =E2=80=9CL=E2=80=9D. But not passionate about that. I am pretty sure that it should end with just =E2=80=9CJSON=E2=80=9D. In p= ractice, people who write JSONPath expressions really don=E2=80=99t care what, under the co= vers, the form of JSON is that it=E2=80=99s being applied to. They probably look= at an example of the input JSON text and while we all know it has to be parsed into some in-memory representation to apply a JSONPath, that's just book-keeping. So my favorite would be "JSONPath: A query syntax for JSON=E2=80=9D I=E2=80= =99m also OK with =E2=80=9Clanguage=E2=80=9D Another wild-card idea: JSONPath: Query expressions for jSON On Thu, Nov 26, 2020 at 8:52 AM Glyn Normington < glyn.normington.work@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On 26 Nov 2020, at 16:50, Carsten Bormann wrote: > > > > On 2020-11-26, at 17:40, Glyn Normington > wrote: > > > On 26 Nov 2020, at 16:31, Alan Painter wrote: > > Just a few off-the-cuff thoughts: > > a. Is there any distinction between "JSON data" and "JSON" itself? > > > Yes, I believe so. The former refers to a piece of data, but the latter > refers to a notation. The distinction is significant when we want to be > precise. > > Could this be simply "A language for querying JSON" ? > > > I think that's fine in the title where concision trumps precision. > > > Well, the title needs to be useful for a much wider audience than the res= t > of the document. This is the first step for someone to decide whether to > go on reading the abstract and then the document. > > For most of us here =E2=80=9CJSON=E2=80=9D is acceptable vernacular for = =E2=80=9CJSON data item=E2=80=9D. > =E2=80=9CGive me a JSON for that.=E2=80=9D, hmm. > But for many people that use JSON only packaged into some products, that > would be weird. > > I think that expressing that we are reaching into those data values is > worth adding a word or two. > > If pointing out the conciseness is less important than conciseness of the > title, I would probably compromise at > > JSONPath: A query language for JSON data > > > +1 > > > (The =E2=80=9Cvalues=E2=80=9D addition really doesn=E2=80=99t add much.) > > (I=E2=80=99m also assuming we keep the studlycaps, as XPath did.) > > Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten > > > -- > Jsonpath mailing list > Jsonpath@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonpath > --00000000000043cfa105b5058faf Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I think I=E2=80=99d slightly prefer the term =E2=80=9Csyntax= =E2=80=9D to =E2=80=9Clanguage=E2=80=9D because =E2=80=9Cquery language=E2= =80=9D has a smell of various things that end with the letters =E2=80=9CQ= =E2=80=9D and =E2=80=9CL=E2=80=9D.=C2=A0 But not passionate about that. =C2= =A0

<= div class=3D"gmail_default" style=3D"font-size:small">I am pretty sure that= it should end with just =E2=80=9CJSON=E2=80=9D.=C2=A0 In practice, people = who write JSONPath expressions really don=E2=80=99t care what, under the co= vers, the form of JSON is that it=E2=80=99s being applied to.=C2=A0 They pr= obably look at an example of the input JSON text and while we all know it h= as to be parsed into some in-memory representation to=C2=A0apply a JSONPath= , that's just book-keeping.=C2=A0

So my favorite would be "JSONPath: A query syntax for JSO= N=E2=80=9D I=E2=80=99m also OK with =E2=80=9Clanguage=E2=80=9D

Another wild-card idea: JSONPath: Que= ry expressions for jSON

On Thu, Nov 26, 2020 at 8:52 AM Glyn Nor= mington <glyn.normingt= on.work@gmail.com> wrote:


On 26 Nov 2020, at 16:50, Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> wrote:


On 2020-11-26, at 17:40, Glyn Normington <glyn.normington.work@gma= il.com> wrote:


On 26 Nov 2020, = at 16:31, Alan Painter <alan.painter@gmail.com> wrote:

Just a few off-the= -cuff thoughts:

a.=C2=A0 Is there any distinction between "JSON= data" and "JSON" itself?

Yes, I believe= so. The former refers to a piece of data, but the latter refers to a notat= ion. The distinction is significant when we want to be precise.

Could this be simply "A language for querying JS= ON" ?

I think that's fine in the title where c= oncision trumps precision.

Well, the title needs to be useful for= a much wider audience than the rest of the document.=C2=A0 This is the fir= st step for someone to decide whether to go on reading the abstract and the= n the document.

For most of us here =E2=80=9CJSON=E2= =80=9D is acceptable vernacular for =E2=80=9CJSON data item=E2=80=9D.
=E2=80= =9CGive me a JSON for that.=E2=80=9D, hmm.
But for many people that use JSON= only packaged into some products, that would be weird.

= I think that expressing that we are reaching into those data values is wort= h adding a word or two.

If pointing out the conciseness = is less important than conciseness of the title, I would probably compromis= e at

JSONPath: A query language for JSON data

+1


(The =E2=80=9Cvalues=E2=80=9D addition really doesn=E2=80= =99t add much.)

(I=E2=80=99m also assuming we keep the= studlycaps, as XPath did.)

<= span style=3D"font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-v= ariant-caps:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:star= t;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;t= ext-decoration:none;float:none;display:inline">Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten

--
Jsonpath mailing list
Jsonpath@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonpath
--00000000000043cfa105b5058faf-- From nobody Thu Nov 26 09:10:27 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2197D3A14EF for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 09:10:26 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.097 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DCJY8XlSxOrU for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 09:10:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-il1-x12d.google.com (mail-il1-x12d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::12d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4031C3A11A2 for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 09:10:24 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-il1-x12d.google.com with SMTP id p5so2362794iln.8 for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 09:10:24 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=i8ylwTKTgyZq/3J5+ZhQaDQ37Eg4p9uW0igKcy6/3II=; b=raaUg2PY6OirkBnX/qBdaysCqVek0wzzrJeM4qS/hLzx7mYLfjxlRScQRV2r4x1N72 lad8JvRbla0+VwfIx7dqxcnjGsJ/wvyPlZ6F/fU5zUb/BDVMG0oKm8nVueGKmWjzff7B qbNeCvXRQhxJk/q/GaGpUdhOOaCNXuFNx/VAG/WsD/rJfnmIV7Ai/7F2nmPLqs9OfOIc /Q1jykLR6ildHVdLY6vE3Bwnm2KRK7mCBDqPzxW0C8Zb1GykvjZjPJobHHGSskELZS9t JSL3wwX3T0vPlgzle5T5oYO+wG1GxkxNKZDNIHopGZzugnoEzzrLJonECF5ccgDdwgFA qk0g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=i8ylwTKTgyZq/3J5+ZhQaDQ37Eg4p9uW0igKcy6/3II=; b=pt6N3xphQ10XRylfamyhiDsJBwL6oUR7V/dW30xWsiTb1HgN2W8lcYEBHt8ns0JE2Q z1Ho4NBE2zQp3nJKIvefFZtuv0Wuw/hpigyw1szWluz04Q13q5m9Gb+CvFucBUy9KKwV QX5KdP3Mpe4OrIZs02yDlZxfVgWPyI+ffo9g1FTI+GxCSdJ7AAI99lyBfWLWSwj9Cby1 xJwHxrKhEZRwKhXTaGPwreOrH4XV6lHz9b8LQdZEDHzr05XksFpL3r/YNm/7RvKgIvR6 lJXlsrzDQjZ5UUe44bFBz674VL5kf4zHnGtk0cu3SWczWQNsWs9oLNKsDT25zPxgN45i 4SEw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM53000iU89zqXLlwoRCmRAgP8fMXHIklHEw3cRMrpqvnGA3evgEDk REGfNaWTkeOkKNMYDLmauBjM/Ed22vcoaePekk62rTEg X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzXu1qxE/jdYceMaQFYjDuV+FcvhZNwkIULvzZEMBcggaCbLMskUSDgAz9Hvd8r582lXkFe51W7/Ctyy9xoGmU= X-Received: by 2002:a92:cc92:: with SMTP id x18mr3189974ilo.63.1606410623313; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 09:10:23 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <0C9AFBC5-491A-4433-86A7-CCF68DF83A59@tzi.org> <8DFB26D6-42FD-4215-9A7C-D10D28729224@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: From: Alan Painter Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2020 18:10:20 +0100 Message-ID: To: jsonpath@ietf.org Cc: Glyn Normington , Carsten Bormann , Tim Bray Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000090ecf305b5059e4b" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] Title of the specification X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2020 17:10:26 -0000 --00000000000090ecf305b5059e4b Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable +1 for "JSON" sans the "data" qualifier On Thu, Nov 26, 2020 at 6:06 PM Tim Bray wrote: > I think I=E2=80=99d slightly prefer the term =E2=80=9Csyntax=E2=80=9D to = =E2=80=9Clanguage=E2=80=9D because =E2=80=9Cquery > language=E2=80=9D has a smell of various things that end with the letters= =E2=80=9CQ=E2=80=9D and > =E2=80=9CL=E2=80=9D. But not passionate about that. > > I am pretty sure that it should end with just =E2=80=9CJSON=E2=80=9D. In= practice, people > who write JSONPath expressions really don=E2=80=99t care what, under the = covers, > the form of JSON is that it=E2=80=99s being applied to. They probably lo= ok at an > example of the input JSON text and while we all know it has to be parsed > into some in-memory representation to apply a JSONPath, that's just > book-keeping. > > So my favorite would be "JSONPath: A query syntax for JSON=E2=80=9D I=E2= =80=99m also OK > with =E2=80=9Clanguage=E2=80=9D > > Another wild-card idea: JSONPath: Query expressions for jSON > > On Thu, Nov 26, 2020 at 8:52 AM Glyn Normington < > glyn.normington.work@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On 26 Nov 2020, at 16:50, Carsten Bormann wrote: >> >> >> >> On 2020-11-26, at 17:40, Glyn Normington >> wrote: >> >> >> On 26 Nov 2020, at 16:31, Alan Painter wrote: >> >> Just a few off-the-cuff thoughts: >> >> a. Is there any distinction between "JSON data" and "JSON" itself? >> >> >> Yes, I believe so. The former refers to a piece of data, but the latter >> refers to a notation. The distinction is significant when we want to be >> precise. >> >> Could this be simply "A language for querying JSON" ? >> >> >> I think that's fine in the title where concision trumps precision. >> >> >> Well, the title needs to be useful for a much wider audience than the >> rest of the document. This is the first step for someone to decide whet= her >> to go on reading the abstract and then the document. >> >> For most of us here =E2=80=9CJSON=E2=80=9D is acceptable vernacular for = =E2=80=9CJSON data item=E2=80=9D. >> =E2=80=9CGive me a JSON for that.=E2=80=9D, hmm. >> But for many people that use JSON only packaged into some products, that >> would be weird. >> >> I think that expressing that we are reaching into those data values is >> worth adding a word or two. >> >> If pointing out the conciseness is less important than conciseness of th= e >> title, I would probably compromise at >> >> JSONPath: A query language for JSON data >> >> >> +1 >> >> >> (The =E2=80=9Cvalues=E2=80=9D addition really doesn=E2=80=99t add much.) >> >> (I=E2=80=99m also assuming we keep the studlycaps, as XPath did.) >> >> Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten >> >> >> -- >> Jsonpath mailing list >> Jsonpath@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonpath >> > --00000000000090ecf305b5059e4b Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
+1 for "JSON" sans the "data" qualifie= r

On Thu, Nov 26, 2020 at 6:06 PM Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com> wrote:
I think I=E2=80=99d slight= ly prefer the term =E2=80=9Csyntax=E2=80=9D to =E2=80=9Clanguage=E2=80=9D b= ecause =E2=80=9Cquery language=E2=80=9D has a smell of various things that = end with the letters =E2=80=9CQ=E2=80=9D and =E2=80=9CL=E2=80=9D.=C2=A0 But= not passionate about that. =C2=A0

I am pretty sure that it should end with just =E2=80=9CJSON=E2= =80=9D.=C2=A0 In practice, people who write JSONPath expressions really don= =E2=80=99t care what, under the covers, the form of JSON is that it=E2=80= =99s being applied to.=C2=A0 They probably look at an example of the input = JSON text and while we all know it has to be parsed into some in-memory rep= resentation to=C2=A0apply a JSONPath, that's just book-keeping.=C2=A0

So my favorite would be &q= uot;JSONPath: A query syntax for JSON=E2=80=9D I=E2=80=99m also OK with =E2= =80=9Clanguage=E2=80=9D

A= nother wild-card idea: JSONPath: Query expressions for jSON

On T= hu, Nov 26, 2020 at 8:52 AM Glyn Normington <glyn.normington.work@gmail.com= > wrote:


On 26 Nov 2020, at 16:50, Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> wrote:



glyn.normington.work@gmail.com&= gt; wrote:


On 26 Nov 2020, at 16:31, A= lan Painter <alan.painter@gmail.com> wrote:

Just a few off-the-cuff thoug= hts:

a.=C2=A0 Is there any distinction between "JSON data"= and "JSON" itself?

Yes, I believe so. The fo= rmer refers to a piece of data, but the latter refers to a notation. The di= stinction is significant when we want to be precise.

Could this be simply "A language for querying JSON" ?<= br>

I think that's fine in the title where concision tr= umps precision.

Well, the title needs to be useful for a much wide= r audience than the rest of the document.=C2=A0 This is the first step for = someone to decide whether to go on reading the abstract and then the docume= nt.

For most of us here =E2=80=9CJSON=E2=80=9D is accept= able vernacular for =E2=80=9CJSON data item=E2=80=9D.
=E2=80=9CGive me a JSO= N for that.=E2=80=9D, hmm.
But for many people that use JSON only packaged i= nto some products, that would be weird.

I think that exp= ressing that we are reaching into those data values is worth adding a word = or two.

If pointing out the conciseness is less importan= t than conciseness of the title, I would probably compromise at

JSONPath: A query language for JSON data
=

+1


= (The =E2=80=9Cvalues=E2=80=9D addition really doesn=E2=80=99t add much.)

(I=E2=80=99m also assuming we keep the studlycaps, as XPat= h did.)

Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten

--
Jsonpath mailing list
Jsonpath@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonpath
--00000000000090ecf305b5059e4b-- From nobody Thu Nov 26 09:11:01 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D596A3A14EF for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 09:10:59 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.097 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, FREEMAIL_REPLY=1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5NBA8tP49Tlw for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 09:10:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wm1-x336.google.com (mail-wm1-x336.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::336]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B01153A11A2 for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 09:10:57 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wm1-x336.google.com with SMTP id c198so2785780wmd.0 for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 09:10:57 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=g9Dgrb6PSdHbj6wd+Qp7bZ348fmw1zRNdL+r5WyJ3/U=; b=MOPpAUuVMJLzSo161TNlVpmYAuqaKZuqM4/rCBQpJHMkkE7vyGJmCBPcYChhuXHegD e6LN/qQxshDNi/KVj3L7N9ZPo12NVzophVO+DF+bM6uHx1M1eq+5K2CADhHWjJjcZaMZ gkWK31EZI3Qqe1BYxFG/2uLEPBUzo3n3Ld8r/nCimTfC05NWkbCQb5lZSI5EI+rRrxTm FBCXpBWti6J6/h5FL32Cv6eYEs0khPNsSqTJzgV6QNibbH3f7qsynoNOmV4gXAK9QUyU vI+tTlVbrX0OYQEpyWrvKfTGkFje8OToefGYkcYkOZvySO1UntuJqCysLm4jjozC/Hqf bzDQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=g9Dgrb6PSdHbj6wd+Qp7bZ348fmw1zRNdL+r5WyJ3/U=; b=pwiC/Dxo/GpAtFf9Evb5wyzNZS2ZE3sqpGOt0i9VrSZ7jOf906o3zcEaDuuxKMtYoo KCgUPbEPDst36luWvuiiotzsMpmisWTqKr3Lg06YNo2aaPaZFQKiNoA5/5185KrVeehl QzeYOf/1v93pdH6Liq+eK7CIKgwFa0X3RkgpgQ0KuB5U0t04hSoiOElteW7ZsGPiWDgm DMNRUKiCQiW2EAxoGyjQn0pG01nTBPfUAB0b4UBenpBGLN3eKbOWxjiChShnk9qZi3g7 H+z6FaTtrkBnui1l/78/XGlUplYcg3j9OPCJK+c11CWysATuPJ75U1cqTJ2AmjR4nT1e D1Gw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531zoWTfuIUMz6T9Nl0iJ4YxkSxO0Th02RUWZtUiMOjPHlUtLNBx GeHKq5v5ZUCr8uzyJs2+9U8= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxzfQhrVKGk2R6REIYMxbovd1RsMlBmfCGTZDI12neiG+DxuYvzI1ribkTjOoW/Nvas8coMpA== X-Received: by 2002:a7b:cf26:: with SMTP id m6mr4530339wmg.121.1606410656029; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 09:10:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.97] (2.144.199.146.dyn.plus.net. [146.199.144.2]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d3sm9485095wrr.2.2020.11.26.09.10.54 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 26 Nov 2020 09:10:55 -0800 (PST) From: Glyn Normington Message-Id: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_100E74C2-6551-4E98-B01C-ADFE31EDC51E" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\)) Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2020 17:10:54 +0000 In-Reply-To: Cc: Carsten Bormann , jsonpath@ietf.org, Alan Painter To: Tim Bray References: <0C9AFBC5-491A-4433-86A7-CCF68DF83A59@tzi.org> <8DFB26D6-42FD-4215-9A7C-D10D28729224@gmail.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] Title of the specification X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2020 17:11:00 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_100E74C2-6551-4E98-B01C-ADFE31EDC51E Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > On 26 Nov 2020, at 17:05, Tim Bray wrote: >=20 > I think I=E2=80=99d slightly prefer the term =E2=80=9Csyntax=E2=80=9D = to =E2=80=9Clanguage=E2=80=9D because =E2=80=9Cquery language=E2=80=9D = has a smell of various things that end with the letters =E2=80=9CQ=E2=80=9D= and =E2=80=9CL=E2=80=9D. But not passionate about that. =20 >=20 > I am pretty sure that it should end with just =E2=80=9CJSON=E2=80=9D. = In practice, people who write JSONPath expressions really don=E2=80=99t = care what, under the covers, the form of JSON is that it=E2=80=99s being = applied to. They probably look at an example of the input JSON text and = while we all know it has to be parsed into some in-memory representation = to apply a JSONPath, that's just book-keeping.=20 >=20 > So my favorite would be "JSONPath: A query syntax for JSON=E2=80=9D = I=E2=80=99m also OK with =E2=80=9Clanguage=E2=80=9D One downside of syntax is that it might give the impression of =E2=80=9Cbu= t not semantics=E2=80=9D. But I don=E2=80=99t feel strongly. >=20 > Another wild-card idea: JSONPath: Query expressions for jSON I quite like that. >=20 > On Thu, Nov 26, 2020 at 8:52 AM Glyn Normington = > = wrote: >=20 >=20 >> On 26 Nov 2020, at 16:50, Carsten Bormann > wrote: >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >>> On 2020-11-26, at 17:40, Glyn Normington = > = wrote: >>>=20 >>>=20 >>>> On 26 Nov 2020, at 16:31, Alan Painter > wrote: >>>>=20 >>>> Just a few off-the-cuff thoughts: >>>>=20 >>>> a. Is there any distinction between "JSON data" and "JSON" itself? >>>=20 >>> Yes, I believe so. The former refers to a piece of data, but the = latter refers to a notation. The distinction is significant when we want = to be precise. >>>=20 >>>> Could this be simply "A language for querying JSON" ? >>>=20 >>> I think that's fine in the title where concision trumps precision. >>=20 >> Well, the title needs to be useful for a much wider audience than the = rest of the document. This is the first step for someone to decide = whether to go on reading the abstract and then the document. >>=20 >> For most of us here =E2=80=9CJSON=E2=80=9D is acceptable vernacular = for =E2=80=9CJSON data item=E2=80=9D. >> =E2=80=9CGive me a JSON for that.=E2=80=9D, hmm. >> But for many people that use JSON only packaged into some products, = that would be weird. >>=20 >> I think that expressing that we are reaching into those data values = is worth adding a word or two. >>=20 >> If pointing out the conciseness is less important than conciseness of = the title, I would probably compromise at >>=20 >> JSONPath: A query language for JSON data >=20 > +1 >=20 >>=20 >> (The =E2=80=9Cvalues=E2=80=9D addition really doesn=E2=80=99t add = much.) >>=20 >> (I=E2=80=99m also assuming we keep the studlycaps, as XPath did.) >>=20 >> Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten >=20 > --=20 > Jsonpath mailing list > Jsonpath@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonpath = --Apple-Mail=_100E74C2-6551-4E98-B01C-ADFE31EDC51E Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8

On 26 Nov 2020, at 17:05, Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com> wrote:

I think I=E2=80=99d slightly prefer the term = =E2=80=9Csyntax=E2=80=9D to =E2=80=9Clanguage=E2=80=9D because =E2=80=9Cqu= ery language=E2=80=9D has a smell of various things that end with the = letters =E2=80=9CQ=E2=80=9D and =E2=80=9CL=E2=80=9D.  But not = passionate about that.  

I am pretty sure that = it should end with just =E2=80=9CJSON=E2=80=9D.  In practice, = people who write JSONPath expressions really don=E2=80=99t care what, = under the covers, the form of JSON is that it=E2=80=99s being applied = to.  They probably look at an example of the input JSON text and = while we all know it has to be parsed into some in-memory representation = to apply a JSONPath, that's just book-keeping. 

So= my favorite would be "JSONPath: A query syntax for JSON=E2=80=9D I=E2=80=99= m also OK with = =E2=80=9Clanguage=E2=80=9D

One downside of syntax is that it might give the = impression of =E2=80=9Cbut not semantics=E2=80=9D. But I don=E2=80=99t = feel strongly.


Another wild-card idea: JSONPath: Query = expressions for jSON

I quite like that.


On Thu, Nov = 26, 2020 at 8:52 AM Glyn Normington <glyn.normington.work@gmail.com> wrote:

On 26 Nov 2020, at 16:50, Carsten Bormann = <cabo@tzi.org> wrote:



On 2020-11-26, at 17:40, Glyn Normington = <glyn.normington.work@gmail.com> wrote:

On 26 = Nov 2020, at 16:31, Alan Painter <alan.painter@gmail.com> wrote:

Just a few off-the-cuff thoughts:

a.  Is there any distinction between "JSON data" and = "JSON" itself?

Yes, I believe = so. The former refers to a piece of data, but the latter refers to a = notation. The distinction is significant when we want to be precise.

Could = this be simply "A language for querying JSON" ?

I think that's fine in the title = where concision trumps precision.

Well, the title = needs to be useful for a much wider audience than the rest of the = document.  This is the first step for someone to decide whether to = go on reading the abstract and then the document.

For most of us = here =E2=80=9CJSON=E2=80=9D is acceptable vernacular for =E2=80=9CJSON = data item=E2=80=9D.
=E2=80=9CGive me = a JSON for that.=E2=80=9D, hmm.
But for many = people that use JSON only packaged into some products, that would be = weird.

I think that = expressing that we are reaching into those data values is worth adding a = word or two.

If pointing out = the conciseness is less important than conciseness of the title, I would = probably compromise at

JSONPath: A = query language for JSON data

+1


(The = =E2=80=9Cvalues=E2=80=9D addition really doesn=E2=80=99t add = much.)

(I=E2=80=99m = also assuming we keep the studlycaps, as XPath did.)

Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, = Carsten

--
Jsonpath mailing list
Jsonpath@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonpath

= --Apple-Mail=_100E74C2-6551-4E98-B01C-ADFE31EDC51E-- From nobody Thu Nov 26 11:43:12 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B63033A083F for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 11:43:10 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.92 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.92 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id oxB7lJcMwEwz for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 11:43:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E68163A083E for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 11:43:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.217.120] (p548dce71.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.141.206.113]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4Chp885G02zyWc; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 20:43:04 +0100 (CET) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\)) From: Carsten Bormann In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2020 20:43:04 +0100 Cc: Tim Bray , jsonpath@ietf.org, Alan Painter X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 628112584.108337-cc2696505e0fe2dd20f28d8c59df2338 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <407B7496-BE50-43BD-9160-0E4352CFD9E2@tzi.org> References: <0C9AFBC5-491A-4433-86A7-CCF68DF83A59@tzi.org> <8DFB26D6-42FD-4215-9A7C-D10D28729224@gmail.com> To: Glyn Normington X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] Title of the specification X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2020 19:43:11 -0000 On 2020-11-26, at 18:10, Glyn Normington = wrote: >=20 >> Another wild-card idea: JSONPath: Query expressions for jSON >=20 > I quite like that. Works for me! (With an all-caps =E2=80=9CJSON=E2=80=9D). Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten From nobody Thu Nov 26 11:45:16 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E0AF3A08BB for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 11:45:15 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.92 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.92 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rv5zidEU_Kas for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 11:45:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BB8BA3A08AE for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 11:45:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.217.120] (p548dce71.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.141.206.113]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4ChpBb2yJlzyWc; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 20:45:11 +0100 (CET) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\)) From: Carsten Bormann In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2020 20:45:11 +0100 Cc: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 628112710.932745-cd1f1833e252f21cf39c309a3af16186 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <76B4D7FC-BC5B-467A-9AF1-3053C3EEECC7@tzi.org> References: To: Glyn Normington X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] Merging the drafts X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2020 19:45:15 -0000 On 2020-11-18, at 12:46, Glyn Normington = wrote: >=20 > Following on from the Working Group meeting at IETF 109, Carsten and I = are working on merging the two existing drafts. The goal is to create a = merged document that the Working Group will hopefully decide to adopt as = a starting point. My first PR in Glyn=E2=80=99s repo: https://github.com/jsonpath-standard/internet-draft/pull/42 (How could it be anything but 42.) I didn=E2=80=99t touch the actual text of the normington draft very = much, so I plan to put in another round cleaning up the remaining = redundancies and moving things around when we=E2=80=99ve seen some = feedback on this round. Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten From nobody Thu Nov 26 12:33:04 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30C563A0D03 for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 12:33:03 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id S2SYPffQsDiG for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 12:33:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wr1-x42e.google.com (mail-wr1-x42e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::42e]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4BFE83A0CAC for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 12:33:01 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wr1-x42e.google.com with SMTP id e7so3459566wrv.6 for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 12:33:01 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=YpDcfVAe4vWERhhzT9XnynhnFeDWz3ZUvgyW2emkJkQ=; b=M0RvPrj7DVF7uiaNjtA+FHlam04dlVMxUwt2B1OdpVlbAmCTaxjgCwG+8U1OncEQ25 X6aCVQGlJeIdpVUppSQAcNhSbNa8A3UaIPbQzsv+ACidbnlj5bDo+9xsskw5gIiGhf/m N/xdVQWK70Pe0fLwgfOZ5Gf6B1aerShmvo2gEWAEWm3rJCepHza9AeP663Qi31wpVG+N eHGfL2NwtDZSPLHoEd24MWZ8HJ10CvFexccitMxWUunJeVGqX3pguZ6M/sBu1NSTdKDH dmc9xG9PdW/Qdh6/swWecyvRsgm74UL7aGwlBLwbYwsBR4r4/er18PNfgb6B2RTD3SoP rPPw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=YpDcfVAe4vWERhhzT9XnynhnFeDWz3ZUvgyW2emkJkQ=; b=ifVcAT12AFqJQOk8vY/m8QdHrgi60+xBldYeHq/UqaP1hXuXYtTi4cKjx018OfuYLT 51tYaGaBfSzfRJs3GVyM36aax/pzVJ7hTGKjKIRvNvI/0vuQXRne3oxMGlclOEgH5a5s k6HD2AXsmWw9xJdBr2eihFTSLKoBN6v/81JnUsuK/bnHNCJls8R+mD7kwr0LECvDxhK0 Pd/t5UAWWNtGioS9MuJcIFfHziYTDb7np/gfvw3jTBuO9DODSbc/mVxuGvqtbwg1klwz 3DR7c3wr9nrU1N4cdsoj7xojlDlgsd8XVxk+AxgVQnvE1X0e8lotIc3cyhLTXs4InbDr UUIw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531RWWtq+m3xOJj07xoO4RZNoU1Awu/yfB0KRNzfLdzNu6w+YvX4 q+9gbzks7xTlnMlX+r6mRB0= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyQwV5c3cu86GWUmUIiKuXpJFr8i52Qgi/00swYA13CC+fHvCfKuxW4cjMqDyCIwthrzBxnkQ== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:514a:: with SMTP id u10mr6118967wrt.312.1606422779627; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 12:32:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from normingtong-a01.lan (2.144.199.146.dyn.plus.net. [146.199.144.2]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d16sm11652283wrw.17.2020.11.26.12.32.58 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 26 Nov 2020 12:32:58 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\)) From: Glyn Normington In-Reply-To: <76B4D7FC-BC5B-467A-9AF1-3053C3EEECC7@tzi.org> Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2020 20:32:58 +0000 Cc: jsonpath@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <76B4D7FC-BC5B-467A-9AF1-3053C3EEECC7@tzi.org> To: Carsten Bormann X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] Merging the drafts X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2020 20:33:03 -0000 Thanks Carsten! I won=E2=80=99t be able to review the PR until Monday. I = hope others will have had a chance to make their comments, preferably in = the PR, by then. > On 26 Nov 2020, at 19:45, Carsten Bormann wrote: >=20 > On 2020-11-18, at 12:46, Glyn Normington = wrote: >>=20 >> Following on from the Working Group meeting at IETF 109, Carsten and = I are working on merging the two existing drafts. The goal is to create = a merged document that the Working Group will hopefully decide to adopt = as a starting point. >=20 > My first PR in Glyn=E2=80=99s repo: >=20 > https://github.com/jsonpath-standard/internet-draft/pull/42 >=20 > (How could it be anything but 42.) >=20 > I didn=E2=80=99t touch the actual text of the normington draft very = much, so I plan to put in another round cleaning up the remaining = redundancies and moving things around when we=E2=80=99ve seen some = feedback on this round. >=20 > Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten >=20 From nobody Thu Nov 26 13:33:24 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BED8F3A104D for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 13:33:23 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.898 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=textuality-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id T-JWeWhm_PP2 for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 13:33:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-lj1-x22a.google.com (mail-lj1-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::22a]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D55563A104C for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 13:33:21 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-lj1-x22a.google.com with SMTP id z1so3772522ljn.4 for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 13:33:21 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=textuality-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=KM7M/UwKww8JQKurPwWOXgzrS4T8uQFwo19cLMERJl0=; b=nVo9LUZRme8PHnaG882cI7bh0ycu0gV5LfoWOD61V8Xd8eWbUrtk5UyUQ0iLgGQEj8 ioL5fwhwqgFBadsYggUAivuz0uv7qSFMgHuWZKfyC2VyfYaqFlzhNTLmIEc//erG0pwx bkqhR4xvjCzrh4cXmyKYzGXSimeCK+p1wlQ1VkEz4SMAA9mM+P9cgms2awr3FzCWPJMT cDLaxYhlCAWMW4isWzbP9rBkYy8ty3qFN7P64s9zmerYwlxIjvGRt5IbEBhE8Pn7f0Q7 rcK2vgXEyzsaJH2MuY2hLbCL97XBffmfvgG1VCLoRoVwpd8BRJO1wBLNI1yLyGWkBMwh ub2A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=KM7M/UwKww8JQKurPwWOXgzrS4T8uQFwo19cLMERJl0=; b=l2MF/NPTz97lYnbeLMOo36D1DIWszZcbcQ2a5N7Ji3Av4FourCz8QLzZOR5/+DxK9N fq2B5AqOM/OnQy8vZudWPmqlxvTWLsL4GXJiVCQ3chk1r/tGq39UfRTkAxIBFBqPf1UP IZpLNmv9D13oOg8NUKFB4G/Lbu5C2qiomK3mgYetVOSAMwLHWFAp3/r5ZjMq8hrhtsLx h4SKDItIDTzf6iGWRb25Yp/7fB646R0Tfgirg1a8pDkOXVr+Gp9PyR+Ce1CQNa/rOEoM Bp17FPvIAAtPfpNedwqTXifM8GWAEQjeJZKW3DMmLHQoqq8hMCN1TWxTc1Z66MpbDl6A 599A== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532NbKruS7hiYulcBo7pXB9Js2R8SwxdbSqx1ptCDghn0FNNeoLB 6Us4qRHW1fMZm7w6U+wDevJt/vJgah3JJBPbEVbSMg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxe3X7WtBTQLxTnld0kdK9LQz3vKPDLn6ncIxoq+oqaCCCT+NfraeKU5qzwPAFrijRDx5xyCXvA4Eb6T4d0OnE= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:97c1:: with SMTP id m1mr2100014ljj.278.1606426399805; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 13:33:19 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <76B4D7FC-BC5B-467A-9AF1-3053C3EEECC7@tzi.org> In-Reply-To: From: Tim Bray Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2020 13:33:09 -0800 Message-ID: To: Glyn Normington Cc: Carsten Bormann , jsonpath@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000eb279505b5094aa2" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] Merging the drafts X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2020 21:33:24 -0000 --000000000000eb279505b5094aa2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On behalf of James and myself and everyone really, thanks in advance to Carsten and Glyn for getting this pulled together! On Thu, Nov 26, 2020 at 12:33 PM Glyn Normington < glyn.normington.work@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks Carsten! I won=E2=80=99t be able to review the PR until Monday. I = hope > others will have had a chance to make their comments, preferably in the P= R, > by then. > > > On 26 Nov 2020, at 19:45, Carsten Bormann wrote: > > > > On 2020-11-18, at 12:46, Glyn Normington > wrote: > >> > >> Following on from the Working Group meeting at IETF 109, Carsten and I > are working on merging the two existing drafts. The goal is to create a > merged document that the Working Group will hopefully decide to adopt as = a > starting point. > > > > My first PR in Glyn=E2=80=99s repo: > > > > https://github.com/jsonpath-standard/internet-draft/pull/42 > > > > (How could it be anything but 42.) > > > > I didn=E2=80=99t touch the actual text of the normington draft very muc= h, so I > plan to put in another round cleaning up the remaining redundancies and > moving things around when we=E2=80=99ve seen some feedback on this round. > > > > Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten > > > > -- > Jsonpath mailing list > Jsonpath@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonpath > --000000000000eb279505b5094aa2 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On = behalf of James and myself and everyone really, thanks in advance to Carste= n and Glyn for getting this pulled together!

On Thu, Nov 26, 2020 at 1= 2:33 PM Glyn Normington <glyn.normington.work@gmail.com> wrote:
= Thanks Carsten! I won=E2=80=99t be able to review the PR until Monday. I ho= pe others will have had a chance to make their comments, preferably in the = PR, by then.

> On 26 Nov 2020, at 19:45, Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> wrote:
>
> On 2020-11-18, at 12:46, Glyn Normington <glyn.normington.work@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Following on from the Working Group meeting at IETF 109, Carsten a= nd I are working on merging the two existing drafts. The goal is to create = a merged document that the Working Group will hopefully decide to adopt as = a starting point.
>
> My first PR in Glyn=E2=80=99s repo:
>
> https://github.com/jsonpath-standard= /internet-draft/pull/42
>
> (How could it be anything but 42.)
>
> I didn=E2=80=99t touch the actual text of the normington draft very mu= ch, so I plan to put in another round cleaning up the remaining redundancie= s and moving things around when we=E2=80=99ve seen some feedback on this ro= und.
>
> Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten
>

--
Jsonpath mailing list
Jsonpath@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonpath
--000000000000eb279505b5094aa2-- From nobody Thu Nov 26 14:23:31 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F31E13A0639 for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 14:23:29 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.097 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id L--WCZ8vxvee for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 14:23:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-qk1-x729.google.com (mail-qk1-x729.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::729]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E3A4B3A05F8 for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 14:23:27 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-qk1-x729.google.com with SMTP id v143so2831091qkb.2 for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 14:23:27 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=C4DAVWlp+ugfKMiSK6MjTr/pM1X4PzRezPRP/BlB1Sg=; b=jH5qZUWDAFrRRhYubHMfTP0h6ylEdPpmSkf6FaFNIsHf7KTAJaGXcbPzNnaCfboWyT cwha6vcRc4OPmPTeIXqEP2kF3Y4n7Nh75YmSVtZ5SJQM8E2sN7CAZHFHMqq8hXq3nS+b BxPzeqRo7tgJXOSqGMvifC+Rur/e/Qsg2FuIsJzfiPmHyYZXjWydxByUwZhO2oU2mQzk WuT57I6l7H7ivXYy+qzDjKRxuhPxsfwOFB7fYqmdoPaR2igjGVmLF0SrSyIsJPBbyaOp Qh5m4Mf0VDDtHLp2S/paR4LWW5hvNN/b63IVaKyg1WQUK7MFZ9fQ5qiRtawX/gtnnB/n wJWw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=C4DAVWlp+ugfKMiSK6MjTr/pM1X4PzRezPRP/BlB1Sg=; b=XXZe9mmhePCatjx3tBPLUCgHIykHYS3YFiMbzGlH/kh/KyNeuYaEjXXXl0Lv7L5YBB 3EdN43Nwek41Tm2mcQpgkxUZ/mu5czWhnLu0xvs2/tRMg8kq6atRlSkuzVKGvJwt1e1H yNGPJRMrG6zjJ3EIu0bxOhl7Vxn7q/LLiFXDEyTVFBM8bAmD51r54k8fuIVk6bG6NC/z uJS20GWqH2Dj6twUV6eNjCBbV0aYEeEmLPcN+nqFSYb54mlH9y/OSiqobhfVYgmkeZIh aAaEwH+3RgJs4x7J4kuvwL6PUtOdmaCHh9HPrBV3/SWZ2lkeMKOek/evvMCC1u92aVbZ uizA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532FWIrjM5pwBhcNzbw+LG1saALKYjCEkXsn7pC+kHgolFDdg7IL Q0Ka6++Biupr6HpeABdBJ6Wh3p31K4r8OAnP1I4= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwca3HsmpRAPbMH/q22iq81a3+I+92vEzwBBWui8WP+GZcKDNuOSiOtnDNzmp5C8qUQ+FIUFAfrDLRgsjfSNfY= X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:622:: with SMTP id 2mr5173219qkv.436.1606429406880; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 14:23:26 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <0C9AFBC5-491A-4433-86A7-CCF68DF83A59@tzi.org> <8DFB26D6-42FD-4215-9A7C-D10D28729224@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: From: Marko Mikulicic Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2020 23:23:16 +0100 Message-ID: To: Tim Bray Cc: Glyn Normington , jsonpath@ietf.org, Carsten Bormann , Alan Painter Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000027699905b509fe3c" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] Title of the specification X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2020 22:23:30 -0000 --00000000000027699905b509fe3c Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I don't see anything wrong with calling it a "query language". It's a language. It performs queries. An "expression" commonly means a part of a language that evaluates to a value (e.g. as opposed to a statement). We could say "expression language", but it may be unnecessary in the title and potentially misleading since many expression languages out there can produce new values (e.g. jq) while JSONPath selects matching elements from an input set, which puts it squarely in the realm of query languages. Not sure what's exactly the danger of associating by lexical proximity with the other *QL beasts. Could you please elaborate on that? On Thu, Nov 26, 2020, 18:06 Tim Bray wrote: > I think I=E2=80=99d slightly prefer the term =E2=80=9Csyntax=E2=80=9D to = =E2=80=9Clanguage=E2=80=9D because =E2=80=9Cquery > language=E2=80=9D has a smell of various things that end with the letters= =E2=80=9CQ=E2=80=9D and > =E2=80=9CL=E2=80=9D. But not passionate about that. > > I am pretty sure that it should end with just =E2=80=9CJSON=E2=80=9D. In= practice, people > who write JSONPath expressions really don=E2=80=99t care what, under the = covers, > the form of JSON is that it=E2=80=99s being applied to. They probably lo= ok at an > example of the input JSON text and while we all know it has to be parsed > into some in-memory representation to apply a JSONPath, that's just > book-keeping. > > So my favorite would be "JSONPath: A query syntax for JSON=E2=80=9D I=E2= =80=99m also OK > with =E2=80=9Clanguage=E2=80=9D > > Another wild-card idea: JSONPath: Query expressions for jSON > > On Thu, Nov 26, 2020 at 8:52 AM Glyn Normington < > glyn.normington.work@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On 26 Nov 2020, at 16:50, Carsten Bormann wrote: >> >> >> >> On 2020-11-26, at 17:40, Glyn Normington >> wrote: >> >> >> On 26 Nov 2020, at 16:31, Alan Painter wrote: >> >> Just a few off-the-cuff thoughts: >> >> a. Is there any distinction between "JSON data" and "JSON" itself? >> >> >> Yes, I believe so. The former refers to a piece of data, but the latter >> refers to a notation. The distinction is significant when we want to be >> precise. >> >> Could this be simply "A language for querying JSON" ? >> >> >> I think that's fine in the title where concision trumps precision. >> >> >> Well, the title needs to be useful for a much wider audience than the >> rest of the document. This is the first step for someone to decide whet= her >> to go on reading the abstract and then the document. >> >> For most of us here =E2=80=9CJSON=E2=80=9D is acceptable vernacular for = =E2=80=9CJSON data item=E2=80=9D. >> =E2=80=9CGive me a JSON for that.=E2=80=9D, hmm. >> But for many people that use JSON only packaged into some products, that >> would be weird. >> >> I think that expressing that we are reaching into those data values is >> worth adding a word or two. >> >> If pointing out the conciseness is less important than conciseness of th= e >> title, I would probably compromise at >> >> JSONPath: A query language for JSON data >> >> >> +1 >> >> >> (The =E2=80=9Cvalues=E2=80=9D addition really doesn=E2=80=99t add much.) >> >> (I=E2=80=99m also assuming we keep the studlycaps, as XPath did.) >> >> Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten >> >> >> -- >> Jsonpath mailing list >> Jsonpath@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonpath >> > -- > Jsonpath mailing list > Jsonpath@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonpath > --00000000000027699905b509fe3c Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I don't see anything wrong with calling it a &qu= ot;query language". It's a language. It performs queries.

An "expression" common= ly means a part of a language that evaluates to a value (e.g. as opposed to= a statement). We could say "expression language", but it may be = unnecessary in the title and potentially misleading since many expression l= anguages out there can produce new values (e.g. jq) while JSONPath selects = matching elements from an input set, which puts it squarely in the realm of= query languages.

Not su= re what's exactly the danger of associating by lexical proximity with t= he other *QL beasts. Could you please elaborate on that?

On Thu,= Nov 26, 2020, 18:06 Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com> wrote:
=
I think I=E2=80=99d slig= htly prefer the term =E2=80=9Csyntax=E2=80=9D to =E2=80=9Clanguage=E2=80=9D= because =E2=80=9Cquery language=E2=80=9D has a smell of various things tha= t end with the letters =E2=80=9CQ=E2=80=9D and =E2=80=9CL=E2=80=9D.=C2=A0 B= ut not passionate about that. =C2=A0

I am pretty sure that it should end with just =E2=80=9CJSON=E2= =80=9D.=C2=A0 In practice, people who write JSONPath expressions really don= =E2=80=99t care what, under the covers, the form of JSON is that it=E2=80= =99s being applied to.=C2=A0 They probably look at an example of the input = JSON text and while we all know it has to be parsed into some in-memory rep= resentation to=C2=A0apply a JSONPath, that's just book-keeping.=C2=A0

So my favorite would be &q= uot;JSONPath: A query syntax for JSON=E2=80=9D I=E2=80=99m also OK with =E2= =80=9Clanguage=E2=80=9D

A= nother wild-card idea: JSONPath: Query expressions for jSON

On T= hu, Nov 26, 2020 at 8:52 AM Glyn Normington <glyn= .normington.work@gmail.com> wrote:


On 26 Nov 2020, at 16:50, Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> wrote:



On 2020-11-26, at 17:4= 0, Glyn Normington <glyn.normington.work@gmail.co= m> wrote:


On 26 Nov 2020, at 16= :31, Alan Painter <alan.painter@gmail.com> wrote:<= br>
Just a few off-the-cuff thoughts:

a.=C2=A0 Is there any disti= nction between "JSON data" and "JSON" itself?

Yes, I believe so. The former refers to a piece of data, but the= latter refers to a notation. The distinction is significant when we want t= o be precise.

Could this be simply "A= language for querying JSON" ?

I think that's = fine in the title where concision trumps precision.

Well, the titl= e needs to be useful for a much wider audience than the rest of the documen= t.=C2=A0 This is the first step for someone to decide whether to go on read= ing the abstract and then the document.

For most of us h= ere =E2=80=9CJSON=E2=80=9D is acceptable vernacular for =E2=80=9CJSON data = item=E2=80=9D.
=E2=80=9CGive me a JSON for that.=E2=80=9D, hmm.
But for many = people that use JSON only packaged into some products, that would be weird.=

I think that expressing that we are reaching into those= data values is worth adding a word or two.

If pointing = out the conciseness is less important than conciseness of the title, I woul= d probably compromise at

JSONPath: A query language for = JSON data

+1


(The =E2=80=9Cvalues=E2=80=9D addition= really doesn=E2=80=99t add much.)

(I=E2=80=99m also ass= uming we keep the studlycaps, as XPath did.)

Gr=C3=BC=C3= =9Fe, Carsten

--
Jsonpath mailing list
Jsonpath@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/lis= tinfo/jsonpath
--
Jsonpath mailing list
Jsonpath@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/lis= tinfo/jsonpath
--00000000000027699905b509fe3c-- From nobody Fri Nov 27 03:18:48 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A5B23A0876 for ; Fri, 27 Nov 2020 03:18:47 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.097 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3P8Rbz51VsG7 for ; Fri, 27 Nov 2020 03:18:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-vs1-xe29.google.com (mail-vs1-xe29.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::e29]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EED6D3A0846 for ; Fri, 27 Nov 2020 03:18:45 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-vs1-xe29.google.com with SMTP id m62so2381501vsd.3 for ; Fri, 27 Nov 2020 03:18:45 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=hNoTuCH9PUcMipeS+P+ulLRlD9FRm+QyNUOSQO7FQhQ=; b=GqFw5KDH3fFDOQVrS+73IE04f1/VAqZxlyvdPRqEr0AYOOe5MurpOfxqY0gCOlowKG GEwC+6VS0sMAytAG7n9UHFC654dv2ZkWskpNSLVPgkUAQXCXJtHzsxp9HT5xHhXrkRx8 Pfv+/tv7KPPoxK/0JXdkK+ZGyMX7BDkVpLkBwEc6/Qfa/3i7Sn1Xd2l2bq+CPLojy5ta VXnEV/8JaYpr8s5KS0B4zmRxCOOiDV347c71QD60vtA3cRoEpDFuGCHBWvkJfHTbkn2U SnPjCFjM8U8zukeyl8tNQL1wvn4QjPciu1jcMAlQAYqzPpdbb7qfm8GgNi5WWy4PT95B J8OA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=hNoTuCH9PUcMipeS+P+ulLRlD9FRm+QyNUOSQO7FQhQ=; b=Ko2jbTQPcZqYvK4iRLWgjX5pVa6ZFrx/PWm6nZN+J55LoDl/kG2lCCCmjzuGFFFFRY eO+iFkYYWMz1xTMFUX3aLzQZ+V3YDnDxP0g3pCU1dhAHjo/+0Us3epVIR+braPBOhlFJ iVuq9lurqRq5rnBgvL94ZHt42o6p/8G/rp4I4XcK1JHuA1im1t8L2QMLKSWPfzexwNnw hjCNrFRUPdrpCiBIy/irOF86ocrx0D3VNQTvWAfBCMuXvX5153RIFf502AbQkTALOsWA tIevppRi69fKt22k5331w/usHuymf7E8MhIjK70sSRZeL1NB8gHPF097fqy2f6HXX2z7 059Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530JLQew5xujsqhuOKsOrtjlGVvaw1CE+nC4SBrVAeltMue75UBK PLsfIwhrdHkxiqn7aGGZ9Sz3MsrTSpuf70iy8Ow= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwQAAU8R6h+xFN/VUZWPyTLfw1HTMXfphAmI1tt+4/FwqCPVRcZOhZoHXSv1Yf/Sb6mmWeoG48E4DNT/9UpK7c= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6102:21c6:: with SMTP id r6mr4995137vsg.0.1606475924700; Fri, 27 Nov 2020 03:18:44 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <0C9AFBC5-491A-4433-86A7-CCF68DF83A59@tzi.org> <8DFB26D6-42FD-4215-9A7C-D10D28729224@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 03:18:33 -0800 Message-ID: To: Tim Bray Cc: Glyn Normington , jsonpath@ietf.org, Carsten Bormann , Alan Painter Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000d503d405b514d2fa" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] Title of the specification X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 11:18:47 -0000 --000000000000d503d405b514d2fa Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Nov 26, 2020 at 9:06 AM Tim Bray wrote: > I think I=E2=80=99d slightly prefer the term =E2=80=9Csyntax=E2=80=9D to = =E2=80=9Clanguage=E2=80=9D because =E2=80=9Cquery > language=E2=80=9D has a smell of various things that end with the letters= =E2=80=9CQ=E2=80=9D and > =E2=80=9CL=E2=80=9D. But not passionate about that. > I was going to say this too. Or perhaps "grammar". -MSK --000000000000d503d405b514d2fa Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Thu, Nov 26, 2020 at 9:06 AM Tim Bray = <tbray@textuality.com> wr= ote:
I think I=E2=80=99d slightly prefer the term =E2=80=9Csyntax=E2=80=9D= to =E2=80=9Clanguage=E2=80=9D because =E2=80=9Cquery language=E2=80=9D has= a smell of various things that end with the letters =E2=80=9CQ=E2=80=9D an= d =E2=80=9CL=E2=80=9D.=C2=A0 But not passionate about that. =C2=A0

I was going to say this too.=C2= =A0 Or perhaps "grammar".

-MSK
--000000000000d503d405b514d2fa-- From nobody Fri Nov 27 03:38:38 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C8143A0972 for ; Fri, 27 Nov 2020 03:38:37 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.916 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.916 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id aMtE8rxe2Fm5 for ; Fri, 27 Nov 2020 03:38:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from mailex.mailcore.me (mailex.mailcore.me [94.136.40.145]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AFDD03A0969 for ; Fri, 27 Nov 2020 03:38:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from cpc160115-rdng30-2-0-cust150.15-3.cable.virginm.net ([86.19.35.151] helo=[192.168.0.27]) by smtp04.mailcore.me with esmtpa (Exim 4.92.3) (envelope-from ) id 1kic50-0001jk-RX; Fri, 27 Nov 2020 11:38:33 +0000 From: Michael Kay Message-Id: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_3C7920EB-399A-4A0D-883C-B0D4B007E319" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.7\)) Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 11:38:21 +0000 In-Reply-To: Cc: Tim Bray , jsonpath@ietf.org, Glyn Normington , Carsten Bormann , Alan Painter To: "Murray S. Kucherawy" References: <0C9AFBC5-491A-4433-86A7-CCF68DF83A59@tzi.org> <8DFB26D6-42FD-4215-9A7C-D10D28729224@gmail.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.7) X-Mailcore-Auth: 439400257 X-Mailcore-Domain: 1881035 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] Title of the specification X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 11:38:37 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_3C7920EB-399A-4A0D-883C-B0D4B007E319 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Perhaps JSONPath -- A Selector Language for JSON ("CSS Selectors" are universally referred to as "CSS Selectors", though = the title of the W3C Recommendation is simply "Selectors", probably = because the WG had grander ambitions for them and didn't want to limit = the scope. I suggest the term here because it has connotations = suggesting a fairly small expression language, and will be familiar in = the target user community.) Michael Kay > On 27 Nov 2020, at 11:18, Murray S. Kucherawy = wrote: >=20 > On Thu, Nov 26, 2020 at 9:06 AM Tim Bray > wrote: > I think I=E2=80=99d slightly prefer the term =E2=80=9Csyntax=E2=80=9D = to =E2=80=9Clanguage=E2=80=9D because =E2=80=9Cquery language=E2=80=9D = has a smell of various things that end with the letters =E2=80=9CQ=E2=80=9D= and =E2=80=9CL=E2=80=9D. But not passionate about that. =20 >=20 > I was going to say this too. Or perhaps "grammar". >=20 > -MSK > --=20 > Jsonpath mailing list > Jsonpath@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonpath --Apple-Mail=_3C7920EB-399A-4A0D-883C-B0D4B007E319 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
Perhaps

JSONPath -- = A Selector Language for JSON

("CSS Selectors" are universally referred to as "CSS = Selectors", though the title of the W3C Recommendation is simply = "Selectors", probably because the WG had grander ambitions for them and = didn't want to limit the scope. I suggest the term here because it has = connotations suggesting a fairly small expression language, and will be = familiar in the target user community.)

Michael Kay

On 27 = Nov 2020, at 11:18, Murray S. Kucherawy <superuser@gmail.com>= wrote:

On Thu, Nov 26, 2020 = at 9:06 AM Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com> wrote:
I think = I=E2=80=99d slightly prefer the term =E2=80=9Csyntax=E2=80=9D to = =E2=80=9Clanguage=E2=80=9D because =E2=80=9Cquery language=E2=80=9D has = a smell of various things that end with the letters =E2=80=9CQ=E2=80=9D = and =E2=80=9CL=E2=80=9D.  But not passionate about that. =  

I was going to say this too.  Or = perhaps "grammar".

-MSK
--
Jsonpath mailing list
Jsonpath@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonpath

= --Apple-Mail=_3C7920EB-399A-4A0D-883C-B0D4B007E319-- From nobody Fri Nov 27 04:55:44 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A02BB3A0B10 for ; Fri, 27 Nov 2020 04:55:43 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.919 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.919 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iq6PFE53jleq for ; Fri, 27 Nov 2020 04:55:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3987D3A0B0E for ; Fri, 27 Nov 2020 04:55:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.217.118] (p548dce71.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.141.206.113]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4CjF3Z0mvXzyTh; Fri, 27 Nov 2020 13:55:38 +0100 (CET) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\)) From: Carsten Bormann In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 13:55:37 +0100 Cc: Tim Bray , jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 628174537.618076-9bee7207953af2348951677ea8e7fd52 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <0C9AFBC5-491A-4433-86A7-CCF68DF83A59@tzi.org> <8DFB26D6-42FD-4215-9A7C-D10D28729224@gmail.com> To: Marko Mikulicic X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] Title of the specification X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 12:55:44 -0000 On Thu, Nov 26, 2020, 18:06 Tim Bray wrote: >=20 > Another wild-card idea: JSONPath: Query expressions for jSON The beauty of this is that the plural form =E2=80=9Cquery expressions=E2=80= =9D implies a set of expressions, so it implies =E2=80=9Clanguage=E2=80=9D= . It=E2=80=99s indeed more than the grammar/syntax of those, so why not = talk about the expressions as a whole. This also makes it possible to = just use =E2=80=9Cfor JSON=E2=80=9D, without going into detail what = these query expressions operate on. > On 2020-11-26, at 23:23, Marko Mikulicic wrote: >=20 > An "expression" commonly means a part of a language that evaluates to = a value (e.g. as opposed to a statement). In programming languages maybe. This says =E2=80=9Cquery = expressions=E2=80=9D. (See the first entry on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expression: =C2=BBExpression (linguistics), a textual unit (commonly known as = sentence)=C2=AB, and it goes on for six more before coming to the = programming language idiom, and then goes on to regular expression.) Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten