It is very clean indeed. I do not see any problem for now, but will think about it over night.
Richard On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 2:43 PM, Ben Niven-Jenkins <[email protected]>wrote: > I like it. Ben > > On 17 Jul 2013, at 19:27, Wendy Roome wrote: > > > Folks, > > > > Since each IRD resource must have a unique ID, why not structure the > > "resources" field of an IRD as a JSON dictionary, with the ID names as > > keys? Eg, > > > > "resources" : { > > "default-network-map": { > > "uri" : "http://alto.example.com/networkmap";, > > "media-type" : "application/alto-networkmap+json" > > }, > > "numerical-routing-cost-map": { > > "uri" : "http://alto.example.com/costmap/num/routingcost";, > > "media-type" : "application/alto-costmap+json", > > "capabilities" : { > > "cost-type-names" : [ "num-routing" ] > > }, > > "uses": [ "default-network-map" ] > > }, > > ...... > > > > Yes, that's a change. But that also forces the server to provide unique > > ids. If not, you get a JSON parse error. > > > > > > That also makes it clear that a server's set of IRDs collectively define > a > > map from ids to resource descriptors. I suspect that when given an IRD, > > most clients will build an in-memory map with he ids as keys, and will > > follow any IRD links until they've added every resource to that table. > > > > - Wendy Roome > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > alto mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto > > _______________________________________________ > alto mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto >
_______________________________________________ alto mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
