Michael Kohlhase wrote on 02/05/18 at 08:57:
we have come across the need to communicate OpenMath Objects to JavaScript.
We could go traditional and send over XML and have JS parse that into JS
Objects, or we could use a JSON binding for OpenMath.
It actually seems that Nathan Carter has already done something very
much like that. [1]
Would it make sense to standardize a JSON binding of OpenMath? After
all, JSON is one of the practical competitors for XML and used A LOT on
the web.
[1] https://lurchmath.github.io/openmath-js/site/
For anyone else interested, here is a direct link to the docs:
(please note that I'm not the author)
https://github.com/lurchmath/openmath-js/blob/master/openmath.litcoffee#openmath-module
Some concrete examples:
https://github.com/lurchmath/openmath-js/blob/master/openmath-spec.litcoffee#should-decode-valid-simple-forms
For instance, let's compare the encoding of $x+5$:
- OpenMath:
<OMOBJ xmlns="http://www.openmath.org/OpenMath";><OMA><OMS
cd="arith1" name="plus"/><OMV name="x"/><OMI>5</OMI></OMA></OMOBJ>
- openmath-js:
{"t":"a", c:[ {"t":"sy", "cd":"arith1", "n":"plus"}, {"t":"v",
"n":"x"}, {"t":"i", "v":"5"} ] }
There is another way to encode XML as JSON, called JSONML, which is
pretty much LISP with square brackets:
http://jsonml.org/
- JSONML:
["OMOBJ", {"xmlns":"http://www.openmath.org/OpenMath"}, ["OMA",
["OMS", {"cd":"arith1", "name":"plus"}], ["OMV", {"name":"x"}], ["OMI",
"5"] ]]
As a standard encoding, I'd rather recommend JSONML because it is a
straight mapping of the XML syntax and there are implementations of it
for several programming languages. I've used it extensively for web
applications, generating HTML and XML for both personal projects and
work for customers, and it works well in practice.
Cheers,
--
Alberto González Palomo
Toledo, España / Saarbrücken, Deutschland
https://matracas.org
_______________________________________________
Om mailing list
Om@openmath.org
http://mailman.openmath.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/om
