[occi-wg] Simple JSON rendering for OCCI

[Alexis Richardson]

That is exactly right.

Optionality has to be at the edges.


On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 12:39 PM, Chris Webb
<chris.webb at elastichosts.com> wrote:
> Sam Johnston <samj at samj.net> writes:
>
>> These are both valid alternatives but given our ultimate aim is to reduce
>> costs it makes [a lot] more sense to have a primary format which supports
>> mechanical transforms than to externalise the development to implementors
>> (and then expect the results to be interoperable).
>
> Something implicit here is worth highlighting: this route only leads to
> interoperability if the extra formats are mandatory, not if they're
> optional.
>
> Otherwise, I can write an OCCI-compliant tool in bash which talks KEY VALUE
> text, but it won't be able to connect to Richard's front-end (which only
> understands JSON) or use another provider's front-end (which only
> understands Atom).
>
> The option of making one format mandatory and the others optional won't fly,
> because in that case the only way you write code that's guaranteed to work
> is to use the mandatory format, whereupon you've effectively converged on a
> single rendering in all but name.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Chris.
> _______________________________________________
> occi-wg mailing list
> occi-wg at ogf.org
> http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/occi-wg
>