search

json-patch / json-patch2

A possibile revision to the JSON-Patch format
44 stars 0 forks source link

Have options for shorthand syntax #10

Open disordinary opened 9 years ago

disordinary commented 9 years ago

Full words create needless storage or network traffic, if I had to send thousands of patches through a network connection, or store millions of them in a database I'm wasting allot of bytes needlessly.

So having the ability to have shortened operators and keys would be beneficial something like: replace = rp remove = rm copy = cp move = mv

path = pth value = val

etc

ctranxuan commented 9 years ago

:+1:

sonnyp commented 9 years ago

I don't think we need to add this to the spec. Nothing prevents you from using your own serializer/parser see https://github.com/JSON8/patch#patch-size

Also for millions of items you'd probably go with some + efficient binary format

heruan commented 7 years ago

I agree, this should not be part of the spec. Both network traffic and database values could be compressed (e.g. HTTP Accept-Encoding: gzip, deflate) which would compress your data even more than that!

mitar commented 4 years ago

Yes, such optimizations are at the wrong layer. No need to complicate the patch format to optimize here. Because it is not just about keys, but also about values, they can also be duplicated many times. Compression solves all those problems at once. Many transport formats and databases support compression.