On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 9:58 PM, Benoit Chesneau <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 3:03 PM, Jason Smith <[email protected]> wrote: >> tl;dr = Minor disagreement with Benoit but happy to go with his decision. >> >> On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 1:10 PM, Benoit Chesneau <[email protected]> wrote: >>> On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 12:03 PM, Jason Smith <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 10:15 AM, Benoit Chesneau <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>>> well as a database, CouchDB shouldn't change the way data are saved >>>>> in. I expect that the number I saved under the json type Number [1] >>>>> defined by the spec [2] is correctly saved and returned as is. No >>>>> roundtrip or precision lost should happen. >>>> >>>> Okay. "JSON type Number" is incoherent. JSON has only numerals, no >>>> numbers. JavaScript standards are as relevant as FORTRAN standards. >>>> But may we continue that discussion in JIRA? >>>> >>> I don't follow. JSON describes a number type, and refers to another >>> iso standard too. How it's incoherent. >> >> I could be wrong but I don't see a reference to an ISO or similar >> standard. I am reading RFC 4627. >> > The spec let me think that number should follow the ECMA-754 [1] . But > i will double check. > > Anyway for me a document is a data I post on the disc and it seems > reasonable to get the same result when I want to get it back.
That is a strong point. I wonder if my original opinion may be "right" only in some trivial sense; but difficult for users. CouchDB should be relaxing. -- Iris Couch
