On 04/11/2014 11:20 AM, Rob Godfrey wrote:
if we went with JSON we'd also have to define a canonical encoding of all AMQP types into JSON which we've looked at before and doesn't end up pretty...
Why? I think the benefit of using JSON directly is that you avoid needing to do this.
If you go with the AMQP typesystem then you either need a whole host of comparison/equivalence rules - i.e. essentially a canonical mapping into a much simpler typesystem - or you have to have schemas be precise about the exact AMQP type that some variable is (i.e. uint16 not anything else).
And it would make things harder for JMS users, etc...
I'm not convinced it would. Even if exposed simply as JSON I don't think it would be a huge barrier and of course it could be masked behind ObjectMessage or whatever as with the AMQP type system if desired.
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
