# from Ovid
# on Monday 18 August 2008 03:50:
>JSON is fairly well implemented and new implementations are trivial.
> This is not true for YAML. Trying to define a minimum standard of
> YAML for extended TAP is a quagmire. With JSON, we can punt and just
> point to a fairly well-established JSON spec.
I'm all for supporting JSON. I'm all for supporting XML and YAML, and
SVG, and base64-encoded jpg for that matter.
As Michael Peters pointed out, how does the TAP parser decide that a
JSON (or any) document has begun or ended?
In my thinking, the standard says: "there are blocks of diagnostic
content" and specifies their start/end sentinels, including
some "diagnostic format identifier" (encoded in the start sentinel?),
plus the specifics of how a given diagnostic block relates to the test
output (e.g. a diagnostic block is associated with the preceding
Result.)
That means the TAP parser is responsible for finding the start and end
of the diagnostic, probably un-indenting it, and then it has 1: the
type/format and 2: the content. The interpreter for that diagnostic
format+content is another thing entirely.
--Eric
--
"Matter will be damaged in direct proportion to its value."
--Murphy's Constant
---------------------------------------------------
http://scratchcomputing.com
---------------------------------------------------
