Hi! On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 10:36, Roger Erens <roger.erens at e-s-c.biz> wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 22:37, Erik Sundvall <erik.sundvall at liu.se> wrote: > > http://www.imt.liu.se/~erisu/2011/AOM-beauty-contest.html > > is the Javascript Object Dump missing regexps for 'address' and > 'electronic_communications'? Or is that irrelevant? Thanks for spotting that, obviously something went wrong in the object dump. I have now commented that on the web page. > In the YAML, some comma separated key-value pairs are condensed into 1 > line; it would be nicer if they could all be on their own line: makes > it lengthier, but more readable and a fairer comparison to the other > formats. > I think this is the default way of nesting flow style within block style with limited line length, but we should double check that, I agree that one line per thing would be more readable. Perhaps that can be configured in serializers. On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 02:35, Heath Frankel < heath.frankel at oceaninformatics.com> wrote: > > Interesting to see the line up. Can?t believe that XML wasn?t the longest > file in the list, that kills one of the arguments for JSON vs XML. > Well that depends how you measure length or weight in bytes in readable or compact form. Have a look at the bottom of the http://www.imt.liu.se/~erisu/2011/AOM-beauty-contest.html where I have now added some length comparison of whitespace-compressed formats. For someone that is not aware of YAML, are the white space significant. > Indentation level is significant when using YAML block style but not YAML flow style. See the YAML specification for details. > If so, this kinds of kills it for me, otherwise for a Human reader its > fairly natural to read without lots of brackets of various kinds. > Well aren't the most common ways of defining the tree structures to either use brackets/tags/delimiters of some kind or to use indentation? Do you have any other obvious and still readable methods that avoid brackets etc but where whitespace or indentation is not significant? On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 01:30, Thomas Beale < thomas.beale at oceaninformatics.com> wrote: > nice page - that's quite fun to see them all pasted up there. > My question is: what's the/your purpose for human readability. > I want to replace dADL (completely) to avoid re-invented homegrown wheels that may make people confused by openEHR - and an argument for using dADL was that it is readable. One good reason for having a human readable archetype serialization is for readable diffs (that make tech-people happy) in version control systems. YAML with some kind of embedded cADL might be a good option as canonical archetype serialization for version controlled stuff. Best regards, Erik Sundvall erik.sundvall at liu.se http://www.imt.liu.se/~erisu/ Tel: +46-13-286733 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20111202/500d81bc/attachment.html>
