Standard MIME content-type

[pavelnikolov]

What do you think about adding new HTTP content-type for jsonlines data.
What about application/jsonl?

[jbaehr]

I'd rather prefer application/json-lines otherwise it may look like a typo ;-)

In addition to the Media Type, a registered structured suffix may be interesting. In my eyes even more useful, to create media types like application/vnd.my-company.some-thing+json-lines.

See also:
https://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/
https://www.iana.org/assignments/media-type-structured-suffix/

@wardi have you considered filing a registration for a json-lines Media Type and structured suffix at IANA?

[karmakaze]

There is an IETF RFC 7464 for JSON Text Sequences that uses mime type: application/json-seq

It allows prefixing each JSON record with <RS> control character and requires ending each JSON record with <LF>.

Also see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JSON_streaming

[jbaehr]

This seems like a duplicate of #9. The whole purpose of the Content-Type header is to communicate the media type.

[whlavina]

The lack of a definitive IANA Media Type for JSON Lines causes some difficulty for those of us using the format. In the interest of pushing the issue, I took the liberty of starting a conversation:
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/json/dWMWD0JDa2HiUYjWjLjrQExeIx4/

Perhaps someone here would like to join that thread?

Disclaimer: I am in no way affiliated with the IANA/IETF. I am merely interested in using the format, correctly.

[sp4ce]

@whlavina the response from Tim Bray was the most helpful and it looks nothing had happened since then. I'll copy the interesting bit here for reference

to register a media type you need to link to a stable specification. The contents of https://jsonlines.org/ probably don’t qualify, so the conventional thing would be to write an Internet-Draft which AFAICT would be the same as json-seq only without the leading "ASCII Record Separator (0x1E)" but retaining the trailing \n.

[sp4ce]

I am linking the relevant RFC to suggest new MIME type for standardisation:

https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6838.html

I propose working on adding the mime type application/jsonl into the standard tree (section 3.1). Adding to the standard tree seems the most convoluted, but also, I think this is where it would fit the best.

Among the two ways they list to get it added to the standard tree:

1. in the case of registrations associated with IETF specifications,
   approved directly by the IESG, or

2. registered by a recognized standards-related organization using
   the "Specification Required" IANA registration policy [RFC5226]
   (which implies Expert Review).

I think the second one is the most relevant, which leads to https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5226

https://www.iana.org/form/media-types

[frederikb]

Hi @sp4ce, good to see that someone is leading the way to an actual RFC!

I've noticied that AWS is (apparently) using JSON Lines for one of their products. I haven't seen a description of the actual output to know whether or not it is compatible with JSON Lines. In any case they are using the mime type application/jsonlines. Thoughts on application/jsonl vs. that one?