[Fuego] JSON schema and examples for Fuego's run.json format

Milo Casagrande milo.casagrande at linaro.org
Fri Jun 30 07:54:51 UTC 2017


On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 2:47 AM, Bird, Timothy <Tim.Bird at sony.com> wrote:
>
> The RFC3339 spec only allows 1 digit of fractional seconds,
> according to my reading of the spec.  I believe ISO8601 allows
> more fractional seconds digits, but I'd like to stick to a strict
> subset of ISO8601 for the reasons mentioned in RFC3339.  I dug
> into this today (in probably too much gory detail)
> and Python and C support for RFC3339 is kind of messed up.
>
> See my notes on this at:
> http://bird.org/fuego/Issue_0047
>
> I'm working on a patch that uses timestamps in the following format:
> $ date +F_%T%z
> 2017-06-29_17:44:25-0700
>
> This is not strictly compliant with RFC3339, so might be different than what
> kernelCI expects, but I have reasons for my deviations.

Hmmm... I'm not sure I see the necessity for that deviation.
That date string (with an underscore instead of the T character) will
results in errors even in JavaScript.

Since it's JSON and it is based off JavaScript, the date format that
JavaScript can expect is also based on a simplified version of
ISO8601: YYYY-MM-DDTHH:mm:ss.sssZ [1] (it also accepts an RFC2822 date
format).

Although JSON is a human readable data format, it still is a machine
data-interchange format. IMHO, I wouldn't deviate much from the
expected format.
Application that uses the JSON data can then visualize the date (and
the data in general) in a more human friendly way.

[1] https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/Date

-- 
Milo Casagrande
Linaro.org <www.linaro.org> │ Open source software for ARM SoCs


More information about the Fuego mailing list