On 2011-12-14 15:24, Thomas Mueller wrote:
Hi,
getNode("/foo;hash") would return the node
"/foo", together with the ":hash" property (in our implementation).
Is this IETF draft or your extension ? Anyways, it feels extremely
strange.
This is our own extension. I agree it's strange, similar to query
parameters in URIs:
http://www.day.com/day/en/toolbar/search.html?q=test
The ";" is a sub-delim in RFC 3986 (Uniform Resource Identifier (URI):
Generic Syntax) - see also http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986 - quoting:
"
5.4. Reference Resolution Examples
Within a representation with a well defined base URI of
http://a/b/c/d;p?q
"
It *is* a sub-delim, but the quoted text above is irrelevant. With
respect to reference resolution, it behaves exactly the same as "." or
",", for example.
We have used ";hash" and not "?hash" because the "?" is a gen-delim and
not a sub-delim; the correct syntax would need to be "?hash=true", also
Um, no.
other options would need to be added with a "&", in the form
"?hash=true&index=true" instead of the shorter ";hash;index".
You could make it "?hash&index".
I'm not saying that a "JSOP path" should be an "RFC 3986 URI". But I guess
a "path" would be somewhat similar (possibly simpler), and have a somewhat
similar extension mechanism for additional features.
So essentially you want an extension mechanism on the identifier
notation. I don't think this is a good idea.
In JSON Pointer, a pointer identifies a JSON member.
In the JSOP diff format (as initially planned), a pointer is a path
identifying a JCR item.
Best regards, Julian
