* Eric Wilhelm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-08-21T12:46:59] > # from Ovid > >1. YAML is prettier. > >2. JSON, unlike YAML, is stable. > > > >Let's not forget that the debated requirement for diagnostics is that > > the generators and consumers speak the same language > > Does it have to be just one? Now and forever?
Some people want the spec to say that diagnostics (not free-form additional data blocks) are always readable by any TAP consumer, which means they need a declared format. It needs to be at least one declared format. Ovid (and I) would like it to be JSON, pending any better idea (that we agree is better). Schwern would like it to be YAML (a superset of JSON), with the phrasing "consumers MUST understand JSON and SHOULD understand YAML." > Is the specification for either of these going to be part of the TAP > spec? It will probably have a reference to the relied-upon spec. JSON has an RFC. YAML has published, versioned specifications. -- rjbs
