search

cityjson / specs

Specifications for CityJSON, a JSON-based encoding for 3D city models
https://cityjson.org
Creative Commons Zero v1.0 Universal
107 stars 25 forks source link

Suggestion: Have `cityjson` as a file extension for cityjson files #64

Closed CHOWY0152 closed 2 years ago

CHOWY0152 commented 4 years ago

It is not uncommon people work with multiple types of json files: generic json, ndjson (new line json), geojson and cityjson.

It would make sense if cityjson has its own file extension, so it is easily recognizable compared to other json files in a same directory.

liberostelios commented 4 years ago

This would work even better now that we have CityJSON supported by SchemaStore. The some editors (like Visual Studio Code) could do on-the-fly validation by associating a file with our schema based on the file extension. Now, you can only do that if you manually set the "$schema" property yourself.

derhuerst commented 4 years ago

What about .city.json? It would clearly distinguish that we‘re dealing with CityJSON data, but all tools that don‘t know this format specifically would still know that it‘s JSON-based.

liberostelios commented 4 years ago

That's a good idea. But on the other hand, we have the already established practice of .geojson in the geo field. I don't have a clear opinion.

derhuerst commented 4 years ago

That's a good idea. But on the other hand, we have the already established practice of .geojson in the geo field. I don't have a clear opinion.

I've also seen .geo.json, but I have no idea how widespread each one is.

hugoledoux commented 2 years ago

I don't think that enforcing an extension is a good idea at this point, but for the upcoming v1.1 I'll use myfile.city.json for all the example files. Hopefully that will show the way to others.

Related to this, and perhaps more important, is the media type. As discussed in #84, registering a new media type would be sensible, and I'll investigate this. Probably application/city+json is what makes the most sense.