Re: Is there a slim YAML?

Oh and some ideas for naming this "minimal syntax YAML"

uYAML - micro YAML
nYAML - nano YAML - not YAML
YAMLe - YAML embedded


On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 8:44 PM, mofo syne <[email protected]> wrote:
> Question in point: http://talk.commonmark.org/t/metadata-in-documents/721/24
>
>> I'd like to warn about YAML use. Though YAML is very nice for humans, it's very difficult for correctimplementation. Placing it to spec "as is" will create ass pain for client-side parsers. Mostly because of big size. I say this, as author of js-yaml1 - the most popular js implementation.
>
>> It worth to "officially" restrict some YAML features like omap, set, anchros, merge, custom types. That will make possible to create more fast and compact parser for YAML subset. IMHO, it would be enougth to support JSON types and (may be) Date.
>
> Was said by a vitaly from that page.
>
> I would like to know if there is a restricted subset of YAML, that is
> suitable for embedding in other parsers with minimal size for a small
> set of core syntax (but extendible).
>
> If there isn't. Then it is likely that commonmark may devise its own
> YAML restricted variants, but that comes at a cost to consistency
> across YAML implementations. So it is definitely in our interest to
> have at least a common core restricted syntax of the most commonly
> used YAML syntaxes (And a good way to degrade other more advance
> features that is left out, but is still in the input YAML file).

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comprehensive Server Monitoring with Site24x7.
Monitor 10 servers for $9/Month.
Get alerted through email, SMS, voice calls or mobile push notifications.
Take corrective actions from your mobile device.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=154624111&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk