-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 590
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Docs mentioning NDJSON should be JSONL? #1839
Comments
Right I see - thanks for doing all the research. I'll make some updates - for now I think it should mention both. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Related feature requests + implementation:
Describe the bug
At a glance, it seems that JSONL is more relevant format than NDJSON?
yq
docs may want to update to reflect that?jsonlines.org
.ndjson
maintainer activity being low.application/jsonl
mime type.Docs demonstrate parsing multi-line entries (but this is not valid input according to spec?)
That said NDJSON does have an official spec where JSONL does not yet? 🤷♂️
It's implied that NDJSON is considered valid in multiline context due to this
yq
docs example. However that appears to be against spec? (related discussion). As noted by the June 2015 table and the spec, only empty lines are considered valid (optional), but a JSON document should be self-contained within a single line?If updating docs to refer to JSONL instead, the example like NDJSON isn't considered valid, but the example could remain; It should just mention while it's not valid to the format,
yq
supports multi-line JSONL entries?The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: