Open jerstlouis opened 1 year ago
Sadly, this is a known issue, where @3DXScape insisted on using strings instead of proper JSON schema. I believe it was in part to not have to cover that part in the current specification of the standard (allowing third parties to extend the system in a different, URL-based way), but it is making the implementation of the Advanced types of GeoPose very difficult. I would suggest that, instead of using arrays of strings for external systems, we modify the standard to include a proper JSON schema for the types of advanced positioning systems that we actually need to take into consideration.
See also #70 about trying to make the more advanced capabilities simple extensions to the basic GeoPoses. This allows implementers to start small and gradually implement additional features, and I believe this approach is critical for adoption. If adding features means re-starting from scratch, the advanced features may never be implemented, and if the basic capabilties are too limited, none of it is likely to be.
(apologies in advance if this sounds too critical and for providing feedback at this very late stage, but I believe this is an important issue) About the Advanced GeoPose JSON encoding (9.2.4), is there any particular reason why parameters are encoded within a string in a URL-like manner, rather than in the natural JSON way of using objects and arrays? i.e., why:
instead of:
Similar question for the integrityCheck escaping double quotes and curlies in 9.2.7. Why:
instead of:
It necessitates separate parsing passes on the strings and unless there is a really good reason, it seems to defeat the purpose of a JSON encoding.