search

json-schema-org / json-schema-spec

The JSON Schema specification
http://json-schema.org/
Other
3.82k stars 266 forks source link

Mention +json structured suffix #1199

Closed ioggstream closed 2 years ago

ioggstream commented 2 years ago

I expect

to mention "+json" structured suffix we should also cite RFC 8091 here.

awwright commented 2 years ago

@ioggstream Can you please edit this to add some more context? I think I know what you're referring to here (it's a good idea), but contributors who are new to JOSN Schema might not. Specifically: You expect what to mention "+json"? And, where is "here"?

Before you describe your expectation, you can describe the background or what you're trying to accomplish, and then quote what the spec currently says. Also, the headings are a good idea, but they should summarize the purpose of the next paragraph, not begin it. (Splitting a sentence apart between the heading and the next paragraph is kind of confusing.)

jdesrosiers commented 2 years ago

I expect that once the media type is registered, any content related to media-types will be removed and be replaced with a reference to the media type registration.

awwright commented 2 years ago

@jdesrosiers I believe we're talking about a passage of the specification that references application/json as is already registered, and other media types using the "+json" suffix.

With respect to your point, the IANA registry instructions don't necessarily have to be in the same document, but that doesn't mean we have to remove the media type semantics.

handrews commented 2 years ago

@ioggstream RFC 8091 is the +json-seq suffix, what is its relevance here? Did you mean to ask for a reference to RFC 6839 which registers +json? Either way, what exactly is necessary? I notice that the RFCs for application/json-patch+json and application/merge-patch+json do not reference 6839 so I do not understand what we need to do here.

ioggstream commented 2 years ago

@handrews Probably I was mistakenly referencing RFC 6839, but now I don't remember :) I'll close, since rfc 6839 is mentioned.