> On 10 Jun 2015, at 15:04, Martin Bjorklund <[email protected]> wrote: > > Juergen Schoenwaelder <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 09:05:07AM +0200, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: >>> >>> It is also important for the JSON encoding - it means there won’t >> necessarily be a way for mapping XML-encoded instance to JSON and >> vice versa. >>> >> >> Because of two different namespace identifiers. So here we go. > > There are other reasons as well, e.g., <foo>42</foo> might be encoded > as: > > "foo": 42 > > or > > "foo": "42" > > or > > "foo": [42] > > or > > "foo": ["42"] > > depending on the data model. > > > The JSON encoding process needs the data model.
Sure, but we just agreed the data model may not be available for anydata content. So anydata also doesn't guarantee a universal XML-JSON mapping. Lada > > > > /martin -- Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
