You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@johnzon.apache.org by Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de> on 2015/11/10 05:53:23 UTC
JSON-with-types
Hi!
Please excuse if I’m blank on this side.
Is there something like a JSON with information about the types?
E.g. consider a class hierarchy
Customer extends Person extends Partner
Employee extends Person extends Partner
Organisation extends Partner
Now if you have a class ‚Contract‘ which has a Partner you don’t really know whether it is of type Person, Customer, Employee or Organisation. Got me?
Same is if you have Lists, Sets or Maps…
My childish idea was to store this additional type information as comment in JSON. This can be read back by Johnzon.
How useful would that be?
Is there anything in this regard in other JSON libs?
LieGrue,
strub
Re: JSON-with-types
Posted by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>.
Well wondered cause you answered this thread.
About generics we can roll it out, if sby has some more time than me happy
to let him drive but if no volunteer on wednesday ping me back ill do.
About this thread there is no need imo of anything since you can either
enrich the json using core module only or a custom wrapper for the
serialization. Said otherwise you need a small lib on top of johnzon more
than johnzon IMO. If we want to go this way in johnzon-xnew i d go for a
not java typing solution cause json should stay portable imo. In one word:
this thread is surely not over yet ;)
Le 17 nov. 2015 06:55, "Reinhard Sandtner" <re...@gmail.com> a
écrit :
> no not yet but this is also something we need…
>
> its linked to https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JOHNZON-59 <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JOHNZON-59>
>
> lg
> reini
>
>
> > Am 17.11.2015 um 15:29 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau@gmail.com
> >:
> >
> > Hi Reinhard,
> >
> > Is it linked to this topic?
> >
> > If not no "plan" but nothing preventing it AFAIK.
> > Le 17 nov. 2015 05:24, "Reinhard Sandtner" <re...@gmail.com>
> a
> > écrit :
> >
> >> hey folks,
> >>
> >> are there any plans to do a release soon?
> >> we need the new version for production and have a release next week..
> >>
> >> lg
> >> reini
> >>
> >> 2015-11-10 6:02 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>:
> >>
> >>> nothing standard if it is the question, several libs - not johnzon for
> >> now
> >>> - serializes the type in the payload (how ugly is that?!!).
> >>>
> >>> From my experience here are the few things I did/tested:
> >>>
> >>> - i know the type when I deserialize: I enforce it (you know you it is
> >>> Partner and not Person)
> >>> - type can be guessed by checking an (or multiple) attribute (partner
> >> has a
> >>> partnerNumber for instance): instance is created after this condition -
> >> we
> >>> can enhance johnzon to support a "InstanceFactory" or a
> >>> "ClassMappingFactory" for such a case but we would need a kind of
> >> @SeeAlso
> >>> to browse the hierarchy during model creation
> >>> - as other libs serialize the type (I used enums to not have java types
> >>> hardcoded but it is pretty close but less java-ish) when none of
> previous
> >>> solution worked...pretty hate it since it makes the model very
> technical
> >>> and no more really data oriented
> >>> - never used but..: we could have a companion tree, a bit like
> additional
> >>> fields when we speak about java proxying, holding such information
> making
> >>> previous option less invasive in main model. Only issue is the solution
> >> is
> >>> different if we serialize arrays where we would enrich each item or
> >> object
> >>> where we just enrich root object
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Romain Manni-Bucau
> >>> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
> >>> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
> >>> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> >>> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Tomitriber
> >>> <http://www.tomitribe.com>
> >>>
> >>> 2015-11-09 20:53 GMT-08:00 Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de>:
> >>>
> >>>> Hi!
> >>>>
> >>>> Please excuse if I’m blank on this side.
> >>>> Is there something like a JSON with information about the types?
> >>>>
> >>>> E.g. consider a class hierarchy
> >>>> Customer extends Person extends Partner
> >>>> Employee extends Person extends Partner
> >>>> Organisation extends Partner
> >>>>
> >>>> Now if you have a class ‚Contract‘ which has a Partner you don’t
> really
> >>>> know whether it is of type Person, Customer, Employee or Organisation.
> >>> Got
> >>>> me?
> >>>>
> >>>> Same is if you have Lists, Sets or Maps…
> >>>>
> >>>> My childish idea was to store this additional type information as
> >> comment
> >>>> in JSON. This can be read back by Johnzon.
> >>>>
> >>>> How useful would that be?
> >>>> Is there anything in this regard in other JSON libs?
> >>>>
> >>>> LieGrue,
> >>>> strub
> >>>
> >>
>
>
Re: JSON-with-types
Posted by Reinhard Sandtner <re...@gmail.com>.
no not yet but this is also something we need…
its linked to https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JOHNZON-59 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JOHNZON-59>
lg
reini
> Am 17.11.2015 um 15:29 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>:
>
> Hi Reinhard,
>
> Is it linked to this topic?
>
> If not no "plan" but nothing preventing it AFAIK.
> Le 17 nov. 2015 05:24, "Reinhard Sandtner" <re...@gmail.com> a
> écrit :
>
>> hey folks,
>>
>> are there any plans to do a release soon?
>> we need the new version for production and have a release next week..
>>
>> lg
>> reini
>>
>> 2015-11-10 6:02 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>:
>>
>>> nothing standard if it is the question, several libs - not johnzon for
>> now
>>> - serializes the type in the payload (how ugly is that?!!).
>>>
>>> From my experience here are the few things I did/tested:
>>>
>>> - i know the type when I deserialize: I enforce it (you know you it is
>>> Partner and not Person)
>>> - type can be guessed by checking an (or multiple) attribute (partner
>> has a
>>> partnerNumber for instance): instance is created after this condition -
>> we
>>> can enhance johnzon to support a "InstanceFactory" or a
>>> "ClassMappingFactory" for such a case but we would need a kind of
>> @SeeAlso
>>> to browse the hierarchy during model creation
>>> - as other libs serialize the type (I used enums to not have java types
>>> hardcoded but it is pretty close but less java-ish) when none of previous
>>> solution worked...pretty hate it since it makes the model very technical
>>> and no more really data oriented
>>> - never used but..: we could have a companion tree, a bit like additional
>>> fields when we speak about java proxying, holding such information making
>>> previous option less invasive in main model. Only issue is the solution
>> is
>>> different if we serialize arrays where we would enrich each item or
>> object
>>> where we just enrich root object
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>>> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
>>> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
>>> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
>>> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Tomitriber
>>> <http://www.tomitribe.com>
>>>
>>> 2015-11-09 20:53 GMT-08:00 Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de>:
>>>
>>>> Hi!
>>>>
>>>> Please excuse if I’m blank on this side.
>>>> Is there something like a JSON with information about the types?
>>>>
>>>> E.g. consider a class hierarchy
>>>> Customer extends Person extends Partner
>>>> Employee extends Person extends Partner
>>>> Organisation extends Partner
>>>>
>>>> Now if you have a class ‚Contract‘ which has a Partner you don’t really
>>>> know whether it is of type Person, Customer, Employee or Organisation.
>>> Got
>>>> me?
>>>>
>>>> Same is if you have Lists, Sets or Maps…
>>>>
>>>> My childish idea was to store this additional type information as
>> comment
>>>> in JSON. This can be read back by Johnzon.
>>>>
>>>> How useful would that be?
>>>> Is there anything in this regard in other JSON libs?
>>>>
>>>> LieGrue,
>>>> strub
>>>
>>
Re: JSON-with-types
Posted by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>.
Hi Reinhard,
Is it linked to this topic?
If not no "plan" but nothing preventing it AFAIK.
Le 17 nov. 2015 05:24, "Reinhard Sandtner" <re...@gmail.com> a
écrit :
> hey folks,
>
> are there any plans to do a release soon?
> we need the new version for production and have a release next week..
>
> lg
> reini
>
> 2015-11-10 6:02 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>:
>
> > nothing standard if it is the question, several libs - not johnzon for
> now
> > - serializes the type in the payload (how ugly is that?!!).
> >
> > From my experience here are the few things I did/tested:
> >
> > - i know the type when I deserialize: I enforce it (you know you it is
> > Partner and not Person)
> > - type can be guessed by checking an (or multiple) attribute (partner
> has a
> > partnerNumber for instance): instance is created after this condition -
> we
> > can enhance johnzon to support a "InstanceFactory" or a
> > "ClassMappingFactory" for such a case but we would need a kind of
> @SeeAlso
> > to browse the hierarchy during model creation
> > - as other libs serialize the type (I used enums to not have java types
> > hardcoded but it is pretty close but less java-ish) when none of previous
> > solution worked...pretty hate it since it makes the model very technical
> > and no more really data oriented
> > - never used but..: we could have a companion tree, a bit like additional
> > fields when we speak about java proxying, holding such information making
> > previous option less invasive in main model. Only issue is the solution
> is
> > different if we serialize arrays where we would enrich each item or
> object
> > where we just enrich root object
> >
> >
> >
> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
> > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
> > https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> > LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Tomitriber
> > <http://www.tomitribe.com>
> >
> > 2015-11-09 20:53 GMT-08:00 Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de>:
> >
> > > Hi!
> > >
> > > Please excuse if I’m blank on this side.
> > > Is there something like a JSON with information about the types?
> > >
> > > E.g. consider a class hierarchy
> > > Customer extends Person extends Partner
> > > Employee extends Person extends Partner
> > > Organisation extends Partner
> > >
> > > Now if you have a class ‚Contract‘ which has a Partner you don’t really
> > > know whether it is of type Person, Customer, Employee or Organisation.
> > Got
> > > me?
> > >
> > > Same is if you have Lists, Sets or Maps…
> > >
> > > My childish idea was to store this additional type information as
> comment
> > > in JSON. This can be read back by Johnzon.
> > >
> > > How useful would that be?
> > > Is there anything in this regard in other JSON libs?
> > >
> > > LieGrue,
> > > strub
> >
>
Re: JSON-with-types
Posted by Reinhard Sandtner <re...@gmail.com>.
hey folks,
are there any plans to do a release soon?
we need the new version for production and have a release next week..
lg
reini
2015-11-10 6:02 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>:
> nothing standard if it is the question, several libs - not johnzon for now
> - serializes the type in the payload (how ugly is that?!!).
>
> From my experience here are the few things I did/tested:
>
> - i know the type when I deserialize: I enforce it (you know you it is
> Partner and not Person)
> - type can be guessed by checking an (or multiple) attribute (partner has a
> partnerNumber for instance): instance is created after this condition - we
> can enhance johnzon to support a "InstanceFactory" or a
> "ClassMappingFactory" for such a case but we would need a kind of @SeeAlso
> to browse the hierarchy during model creation
> - as other libs serialize the type (I used enums to not have java types
> hardcoded but it is pretty close but less java-ish) when none of previous
> solution worked...pretty hate it since it makes the model very technical
> and no more really data oriented
> - never used but..: we could have a companion tree, a bit like additional
> fields when we speak about java proxying, holding such information making
> previous option less invasive in main model. Only issue is the solution is
> different if we serialize arrays where we would enrich each item or object
> where we just enrich root object
>
>
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Tomitriber
> <http://www.tomitribe.com>
>
> 2015-11-09 20:53 GMT-08:00 Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de>:
>
> > Hi!
> >
> > Please excuse if I’m blank on this side.
> > Is there something like a JSON with information about the types?
> >
> > E.g. consider a class hierarchy
> > Customer extends Person extends Partner
> > Employee extends Person extends Partner
> > Organisation extends Partner
> >
> > Now if you have a class ‚Contract‘ which has a Partner you don’t really
> > know whether it is of type Person, Customer, Employee or Organisation.
> Got
> > me?
> >
> > Same is if you have Lists, Sets or Maps…
> >
> > My childish idea was to store this additional type information as comment
> > in JSON. This can be read back by Johnzon.
> >
> > How useful would that be?
> > Is there anything in this regard in other JSON libs?
> >
> > LieGrue,
> > strub
>
Re: JSON-with-types
Posted by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>.
nothing standard if it is the question, several libs - not johnzon for now
- serializes the type in the payload (how ugly is that?!!).
>From my experience here are the few things I did/tested:
- i know the type when I deserialize: I enforce it (you know you it is
Partner and not Person)
- type can be guessed by checking an (or multiple) attribute (partner has a
partnerNumber for instance): instance is created after this condition - we
can enhance johnzon to support a "InstanceFactory" or a
"ClassMappingFactory" for such a case but we would need a kind of @SeeAlso
to browse the hierarchy during model creation
- as other libs serialize the type (I used enums to not have java types
hardcoded but it is pretty close but less java-ish) when none of previous
solution worked...pretty hate it since it makes the model very technical
and no more really data oriented
- never used but..: we could have a companion tree, a bit like additional
fields when we speak about java proxying, holding such information making
previous option less invasive in main model. Only issue is the solution is
different if we serialize arrays where we would enrich each item or object
where we just enrich root object
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
<http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Tomitriber
<http://www.tomitribe.com>
2015-11-09 20:53 GMT-08:00 Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de>:
> Hi!
>
> Please excuse if I’m blank on this side.
> Is there something like a JSON with information about the types?
>
> E.g. consider a class hierarchy
> Customer extends Person extends Partner
> Employee extends Person extends Partner
> Organisation extends Partner
>
> Now if you have a class ‚Contract‘ which has a Partner you don’t really
> know whether it is of type Person, Customer, Employee or Organisation. Got
> me?
>
> Same is if you have Lists, Sets or Maps…
>
> My childish idea was to store this additional type information as comment
> in JSON. This can be read back by Johnzon.
>
> How useful would that be?
> Is there anything in this regard in other JSON libs?
>
> LieGrue,
> strub