On Jan 8, 2009, at 12:30 AM, Antony Blakey wrote:
On 08/01/2009, at 3:38 PM, Paul Davis wrote:
I was hoping for a way to drill into a hierarchy of a known
document and
grab what I want however deep it might be from a GET (next, I will
ask for
PUT and DELETE :) ).
Partial PUT and DELETE won't ever make it in directly (AFAIK). There
are a couple mailing list threads debating the entire issue of
partial
updates. If there's a development in the JSON community as a whole
for
a diff format, then the last talk was that there would probably be
pretty quick support for a PATCH verb.
The PMC's position is that partial updates (diff == patch) will only
be adopted once there is an RFC for json diffs. The process of
getting an RFC is long and tedious, for good reason.
Eh?
1) This is the *ideal* place to explore diff support. JSON came about
because someone just did it and built things with it.
2) Couch could easily support an update mechanism that would then be
deprecated once Real(TM) "JSON diff" support showed up.
Noah has setup a group for a json diff RFC here: http://groups.google.com/group/json-id
. So far the final position seems to be that he and I have agreed to
disagree about some philosophical points, and he's waiting for me to
draft a RFC - but anyone can drive that as they wish. I have much
more important issues with Couch that I want to push before that
(global references to immutable values, unrestricted db/view names),
and partial updates don't have any backwards-compatible issues, so
I'm not working on it.
Fantastic. So why don't you both implement your ideas in Couch and
then let a broad spectrum of users w/ diverse applications test them
and give feedback? That seems like the only way something sane can
come out.
geir
