You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
This IPLD Schema feature is controversial is it maps model at runtime to a model on wire. But what if nodes across the wire want to use different runtime representation ? Or what if they want to negotiate the wire representation ? On the other hand if you treat it as mapping between logical model and structured model it does seem useful (e.g. logical set mapped to an array of unique elements). Tension comes when different field names are desired or when names are dropped entirely in favor of positional products like tuples)
Representing multiformat via schema seems very useful
Capturing semantics like (sets) are also very useful
Lack of generic link type
Overall it seems like it would be fairly straightforward to implement support for JSON schema, which would not exclude adding support for IPLD schema in the future.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
For a while I have been wanting to do #107, but now I think it is better to consider https://json-schema.org/ instead because:
On the other hand JSON schema lacks certain things that would have been extremely valuable in the context of ucanto
Overall it seems like it would be fairly straightforward to implement support for JSON schema, which would not exclude adding support for IPLD schema in the future.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: