Informal discussion: aligning JSON-based computation vocabularies #3
Description
Hi,
I’m the maintainer of mathjson-solver (a Python project for evaluating expressions stored as JSON).
Over the last few years, we independently arrived at a very similar idea to fpjson: representing computation / expressions directly in JSON, rather than treating JSON as just data.
Recently, I’ve been talking with other implementers in this space (including CortexJS / MathJSON), and a pattern is becoming clear: multiple teams, independently, are defining their own JSON vocabularies and runtimes for computation, often without knowing much about each other’s work.
There’s no proposal, no repo, and no standardization effort at this point — just a few of us who’ve actually built these systems wondering whether it would be useful to talk, compare tradeoffs, and see where alignment or interoperability might make sense before this space gets defined elsewhere.
I wanted to ask openly here:
would you be interested in an informal conversation with other JSON-computation implementers?
Even a short call or async discussion would already be valuable.
If this isn’t interesting or relevant for fpjson, no worries at all — just wanted to reach out directly to the people doing the work.
Best regards,
Martins Mednis