desise format for vocabularies

[Mark Taylor]

On Thu, 3 Oct 2024, Paul Harrison wrote:

> > As a fan of static typing I'm happy with the way it's been done.
> > Deserialising the JSON into a suitable java Object didn't seem painful.
> > 
> > One other benefit of coding flags by presence of a key rather than
> > by a required True/False value for a mandatory key is extensibility:
> > if we decide one day we need another false-defaulting flag in there
> > it can be introduced in a smooth and backwardly compatible way,
> > rather than worrying about desise-v1 JSON objects lacking keys
> > that are mandated by desise-v2.
> > 
> > But anyway - let's not change it unless there's a pretty persuasive
> > reason.
> > 
> 
> As I said in the previous message, I think that “correcting" desise
> is not worth the disruption. However, I am trying to emphasise that
> this is a pattern that we should avoid in future as there is a push
> towards JSON.

Then it seems we disagree; the pattern seems fine to me, and indeed
preferable because of the extensibility consideration I mentioned above.

> As the deprecated key is string typed then is
> 
>   “deprecated” : null
> 
> also a true value? 

I'd say yes; though the VocInVO text "present and mapped to a reserved value"
seems a bit obscure here.

--
Mark Taylor  Astronomical Programmer  Physics, Bristol University, UK
m.b.taylor at bristol.ac.uk          https://www.star.bristol.ac.uk/mbt/