well not supporting the validation for custom serialization code
doesnt sound like a big issue for me but it doesn't prevent to
validate the model. I didn't speak of the merging but for instance 2
different methods/fields decorated with @JsonProperty(name="foo").
For me just doing it already matches the intention behind I-JSON.
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau
http://www.tomitribe.com
http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
https://github.com/rmannibucau
2015-04-20 19:24 GMT+02:00 Eugen Cepoi <cepoi.eugen_at_gmail.com>:
> I think doing it on the model is something else as basically you already
> merge detected properties, so you end up with only one.
> At least that's what I do in Genson, I give preference to the detected
> properties (methods/fields/whatever else) by hierarchy (from most concrete
> to the "highest" parent). And the compiler provides already some safeguards.
>
> Still all that doesn't solve the problem of colliding properties being
> written by the user (via some custom ser. code).
> But well... we can't always prevent people from doing stupid things :)
>
> 2015-04-20 19:11 GMT+02:00 Romain MB <rmannibucau_at_tomitribe.com>:
>>
>> 2015-04-20 19:05 GMT+02:00 Eugen Cepoi <cepoi.eugen_at_gmail.com>:
>> >
>> > 2015-04-19 19:44 GMT+02:00 Romain MB <rmannibucau_at_tomitribe.com>:
>> >>
>> >> Hi Martin
>> >>
>> >> for me it makes sense to support it by default with a flag like the
>> >> one you proposed to switch it off (a bit off topic but do we have
>> >> constants for these flags, something like Jsonb.I_JSON_COMPLIANCE?).
>> >>
>> >> UTF8 by default is quite mandatory IMO, must-ignore as well (already
>> >> discussed IIRC). ISO8601 is the standard for dates of most of
>> >> frameworks, big numbers need to be string whatever we do so finally
>> >> open points from my window are:
>> >>
>> >> - byte data as base64: on johnzon we discussed it and I didn't want it
>> >> cause it was far from Java - that said it is not a super common type
>> >> so not sure it is that important
>> >> - top level construct: don't recall the spec but I think primitives
>> >> (string, numbers) can be supported as well. Jackson does it at least
>> >> so +1 to not support this fail fast behavior
>> >
>> >
>> > I don't think there is much value in being too restrictive, +1 for it.
>> > I don't remember any discussion about accepting to deser. numbers as
>> > strings, strings as numbers etc when possible, but it would be nice.
>> >
>> >>
>> >> - no members with duplicate name: the only point I don't know.
>> >
>> >
>> > This one is painful as it has an impact on performances (esp. if we want
>> > to
>> > prevent user custom code to generate such output)... at the moment I
>> > don't
>> > support it in Genson for this reason.
>> >
>>
>> Can't we do it on the model (ie once for the whole application
>> lifecycle)? I guess here we are lucky compared to JSON-P.
>>
>> >>
>> >> Intellij Idea makes this kind of JON invalid. This is something we
>> >> would need to be able to switch off but I think it makes sense to have
>> >> it by default to detect wrong models.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> >> @rmannibucau
>> >> http://www.tomitribe.com
>> >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> 2015-04-18 19:53 GMT+02:00 Martin Vojtek <voytoo_at_gmail.com>:
>> >> > Hi Experts,
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > JSON-B should provide support or some level of compliance with I-JSON
>> >> > specification.
>> >> >
>> >> > https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7493
>> >> >
>> >> > There are several things to discuss.
>> >> >
>> >> > Should JSON-B support I-JSON by default? My proposal is to not
>> >> > support
>> >> > all
>> >> > the recommendations of I-JSON by default.
>> >> >
>> >> > If we agree on that, what specific parts of I-JSON should JSON-B
>> >> > provide
>> >> > by
>> >> > default?
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > Proposal of parts (of I-JSON) to support by JSON-B by default:
>> >> >
>> >> > Should be supported by default:
>> >> > - Encoding and Characters (UTF-8 by default)
>> >> > - Object constraints (no members with duplicate name)
>> >> > - MUST-IGNORE policy - partial mapping
>> >> > - Time and Date Handling - serialize accoring to I-JSON
>> >> >
>> >> > Should not be supported by default:
>> >> > - Numbers - serialize big number(s) into string (and deser given
>> >> > strings
>> >> > into number)
>> >> > - Top-Level Constructs - fail fast when ser/deser something different
>> >> > than
>> >> > object/array as top-level JSON
>> >> > - binary data encoded as a string in base64url
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > To support I-JSON fully in some case, I propose to provide I-JSON
>> >> > compatibility mode available via config property.
>> >> >
>> >> > JsonbConfig config = new
>> >> > JsonbConfig().setProperty("jsonb.i-json.compliance", true);
>> >> > Jsonb jsonb = JsonbBuilder.create(config);
>> >> >
>> >> > Looking forward to your feedback.
>> >> >
>> >> > MartinV
>> >
>> >
>
>