On Sat, Apr 3, 2010 at 8:59 AM, Joseph Adams <joeyadams3.14...@gmail.com> wrote: > I've been wondering whether the JSON datatype should be strict or > conservative. > > For one, there's strict JSON (following the exact specification). > Then there's more conservative JSON variants. Some JSON parsers > support comments, some support invalid number formats (e.g. '3.' or > '+5'), etc.. > > The consensus seems to be that JSON content should be stored verbatim > (it should store the exact string the client sent to it), as is done > with XML. However, this notion is somewhat incompatible with "Be > conservative in what you do; be liberal in what you accept from > others" because we can't accept loose JSON, then spit out conservative > JSON without messing with the content. > > Here's my idea: the datatype should only allow strict JSON, but there > should be a function that accepts a liberal format, cleans it up to > make it strict JSON, and converts it to JSON. I think making strict > JSON the default makes the most sense because: > * Inputs to the database will most likely be coming from programs, not > humans. > * Output is expected to be valid JSON and work anywhere JSON should work. > * Strict JSON is what more people would expect, I'd think.
+1 -- Mike Rylander | VP, Research and Design | Equinox Software, Inc. / The Evergreen Experts | phone: 1-877-OPEN-ILS (673-6457) | email: mi...@esilibrary.com | web: http://www.esilibrary.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
