[x3d-public] JSON status

[Don Brutzman]

Thanks for steady interest and many efforts on JSON for X3D.

Here is a summary of plans and path taken, repeatedly announced and
unchanged for several years:

   - We are developing each X3D file-encoding specification in order.
   Getting XML, ClassicVRML and Compressed Binary ready and consistent is a
   big step, so that the follow-on file-encoding specifications can have
   similar form and corresponding functionality.
   - Next encoding specifications are EXI, JSON, and Turtle (for Semantic
   Web).
   - We will autogenerate an X3D JSON Schema from X3DUOM, no doubt starting
   with patterns John has established.
   - We have a huge existing test suite of JSON models and will be able to
   verify and validate thoroughly.
   - We will align with whatever JSON Schema is most authoritative.
   - I do not know what ISO will say about using a draft JSON schema - that
   is not a standard.
   - It is worrisome and very strange that the JSON schema is still draft
   after so many years.  Why?  What is broken or missing?

Just found a possible response to their "draft version" problem here;

   - Jason Desrosiers, "Towards a stable JSON Schema" - 20 OCT 2022
   - Why is it a "draft"?, The real problem, Our solution, Standards
   considerations, The bottom line
   - https://json-schema.org/blog/posts/future-of-json-schema

Worth reading.  The JSON-Schema group is a "collective" and so not sure
what any of that actually means, even if they have some sponsorship and are
doing the right things from an open technical perspective.  (A good
question to apply is "what happens if politically things go very wrong -
community schism, hostile industry player, etc.?") Still seems like a
pretty shaky business but Web3D and X3D will press on.

Having the weight of Web3D Consortium as a formal Standards Development
Organization (SDO) and Class A Liaison at International Standards
Organization is a powerful thing.  Membership has value!  If anyone has not
yet joined, protecting and advancing your intellectual investment, please
consider doing so.

   - Join the Web3D Consortium
   - https://www.web3d.org/membership/join

Be careful having fun with X3D JSON!  🤔

all the best, Don
-- 
X3D Graphics, Maritime Robotics, Distributed Simulation
Relative Motion Consulting  https://RelativeMotion.info


On Sat, Oct 4, 2025 at 2:47 PM John Carlson via x3d-public <
x3d-public at web3d.org> wrote:

> Read through some of this as well,
> https://www.web3d.org/x3d/stylesheets/X3dToJson.html
>
> Note that in addition to X3DOM and X_ITE, there is also a prototype JSON
> .x3dj loader (JSON to DOM to XML) for Castle:
> https://github.com/coderextreme/jsonmodelviewer/
>
> But typically, a Pascal programmer would leverage this on their project,
> it’s not in the main model viewer yet that I know of.   Note that Castle,
> in the past, has had special URLs, indicating a X3dToCastle.xslt or special
> flags to add Castlisms.  But I think this is unnecessary for the base model
> viewer.
>
> Further work would involve direct JSON to scenegraph conversion (first
> attempt failed).
>
> John
>
> On Sat, Oct 4, 2025 at 3:52 PM John Carlson <yottzumm at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Oct 4, 2025 at 3:22 PM Don Brutzman via x3d-public <
>> x3d-public at web3d.org>If progress continues as planned, we should be able
>> to have a draft XML DTD/Schema (and hopefully JSON Schema too) in the
>> spring in order to start building, validating, and evaluating models with
>> such new features.
>>
>> Don:
>>
>> Any time you want help with validating JSON documents, let me know.   I
>> can always rev-up my x3droundtrip project as well!
>>
>> I also note that jsonlint provides schema validation that I apparently
>> missed!
>>
>> Here’s a version which supports
>> draft JSON Schema 2020-12:
>>
>> https://www.npmjs.com/package/@prantlf/jsonlint
>>
>> If you can work with uncertainties in npm (check package.json and
>> package-lock.json dependencies and pinned versions, make sure you’re not
>> running postinstall scripts).   Note that npm already checks for
>> vulnerabilities.  And if you have GitHub, it also checks for issues in the
>> package*.json files.
>>
>> I have not seen these features in ant, maven or gradle, but I have seen
>> that maven repositories do report vulnerabilities.
>>
>> One issue I haven’t resolved is choosing emoji’s versus X3D URNs in url
>> fields.  It’s a matter of iri-reference verses uri-reference in the format
>> properties in the schema.
>>
>> Note that I think you’ll probably find many issues with MFNode vs SFNode
>> in X3dToJson.xslt which I haven’t reported.  Most of my XML to JSON
>> conversions have migrated to Holger’s x3d-tidy.
>>
>> John
>>
>> _______________________________________________
> x3d-public mailing list
> x3d-public at web3d.org
> http://web3d.org/mailman/listinfo/x3d-public_web3d.org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://web3d.org/pipermail/x3d-public_web3d.org/attachments/20251005/33d4d6f9/attachment.html>