On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 6:24 PM, John Cowan <cowan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Nico Williams scripsit: > >> "datetime" and such are interpretations of more basic datatypes, > > An interval of time is not a string, any more than a number is a string. > They are both *representable* by strings, but everything is: you can > represent a human being or the planet Saturn by a string. Interval definitely sounds like a tuple, but, sure, JSON texts can represent arrays as text... >> they belong in pre-agreed/documented schema rather than on the wire. > > The decision to do so is arbitrary. Of course it is. How much to describe on the wire vs. schema is... a continuum. Given the JSON we have though... it's best to deal with datetime via schema. My point was and still is that the one thing that's sorely missing is an indefinite-length unescaped binary data encoding, and which is not nearly as complex, notionally, IMO, as other types. Nico --