I hope that this becomes a success and gets implementations in many programming languages.
I hope that this becomes a success and gets implementations in many programming languages.
While I think the idea is neat, a data language should not include processing logic. It's a wash where the constraints get specified, and in my experience, a single point of implementation is far more maintainable.
I think I'm a bit confused, is Q the actual schema or a validator of the schema? I can also validate a JSON document using JavaScript and respond with a true or false based on whether it meets certain criteria. So I think that there's something amiss with your statement above, specifically that "JSON Schema is horribly un-human-friendly". Doesn't Q take JSON and let the user know if it's correct or incorrect? WOuldn't JavaScript, or any other language at that, do the same?
I don't personally understand what is so "un-human-friendly" about it. It is easy to use and understand in my opinion.