Hi guys, thanks a lot for providing initial draft and first comments!
I skimmed through this skeleton and just a nit: What is the difference of below two entries in: DSSSchema["properties"]["OptionalInputs"]["properties"]["KeySelector"]["properties"]["KeyInfo"]["properties"]["KeyInfo"]["properties"]["spkidata"]["items"]["properties"] """ "spkisexp":{ "type":"array", "items":{ "type":"array", "items":{ "type":"string" } } }, "SPKISexp":{ "type":"array", "items":{ "type":"array", "items":{ "type":"string" } } } """ All the best, Stefan.
On 28/11/16 10:39, Juan Carlos Cruellas wrote:
> Dear Andreas, >
> Thank you very much. I have not much experience on JSON so far. What I
> see is that it could be useful to include comments (I have seen that
> there are JSON schema components for adding comments) to make it more
> understable and make it clear where the definitions of the different
> types start and end. >
> As for the contents itself, would say that when the DSS specified the
> XML schema it thought about the relevant elements required for meeting a
> number of good requirements for detailing some of the componentes of the
> signatures, and it seems to be appropiate to keep them in JSON... >
> Regards
> Juan Carlos.
> El 28/11/16 a las 10:04, Andreas Kuehne escribió: >> >> Hi all, >> >> see my draft on a JSON binding attached. >> >> A JSON schema created by the JAXB framework is attached, but the >> expressiveness and readability leaves room for improvements. Does >> anyone has experience in deriving a readable JSON schema from a given >> JSON sample or a XML schema? >> >> Moreover, did the dust settle for an agreed JSON schema format? >> >> >> Greetings, >> >> >> Andreas >>
