[occi-wg] Simple JSON rendering for OCCI

[Tim Bray]

On May 12, 2009, at 4:20 AM, Sam Johnston wrote:

> 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).

You have argued on many occasions that mechanical transformation of  
the OCCI protocol data format is a key requirement.  I've never  
understood why, and I've never engaged in a protocol design where this  
was an issue.  Could you expand on why this matters?  -Tim