We should write an Internet Draft for CompactData. Although this isn't a necessary (or particularly common) path for a data serialisation format, it's the first step to creating an RFC and establishing CompactData as a standard, which will help adoption. I also believe the experience will be very useful for our other projects too.
The RFC for JSON was created many years after JSON gathered widespread usage, YAML never went down that route and the TOML guys are discussing it.
These documents are a starting point and for reference:
Since our objective with CompactData is for it to have no more functionality or data types than JSON, just a more compact format – it could make sense to take inspiration from the latest JSON RFC:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8259
However, we should consider that the above link is an RFC and not an Internet Draft. It seems that this was the original Internet Draft:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-json-i-json-05
We should write an Internet Draft for CompactData. Although this isn't a necessary (or particularly common) path for a data serialisation format, it's the first step to creating an RFC and establishing CompactData as a standard, which will help adoption. I also believe the experience will be very useful for our other projects too.
The RFC for JSON was created many years after JSON gathered widespread usage, YAML never went down that route and the TOML guys are discussing it.
These documents are a starting point and for reference:
Since our objective with CompactData is for it to have no more functionality or data types than JSON, just a more compact format – it could make sense to take inspiration from the latest JSON RFC:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8259
However, we should consider that the above link is an RFC and not an Internet Draft. It seems that this was the original Internet Draft:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-json-i-json-05