Hi,
is there interest to have namespace support in the new format? This would enable data centers to add custom information without fear of clashing, similar to how its done in StationXML and QuakeML.
Now this does complicate the format so I guess the answer to this is that you don't really want it, but it would be nice to have and so I thought to pitch the idea.
JSON has no native namespace support; an example of how it can be done nonetheless is here: http://www.w3.org/Submission/2013/SUBM-prov-json-20130424/#prov-dm-namespace
The default namespace would naturally be the StationXML namespace so basic StationJSON documents would look almost the same as in the current iteration.
All the best,
Lion
Hi,
is there interest to have namespace support in the new format? This would enable data centers to add custom information without fear of clashing, similar to how its done in StationXML and QuakeML.
Now this does complicate the format so I guess the answer to this is that you don't really want it, but it would be nice to have and so I thought to pitch the idea.
JSON has no native namespace support; an example of how it can be done nonetheless is here: http://www.w3.org/Submission/2013/SUBM-prov-json-20130424/#prov-dm-namespace
The default namespace would naturally be the StationXML namespace so basic StationJSON documents would look almost the same as in the current iteration.
All the best,
Lion