Re: [apps-discuss] I-D Action: draft-ietf-appsawg-json-pointer-01.txt

"Paul C. Bryan" <pbryan@anode.ca> Tue, 13 March 2012 15:22 UTC

Return-Path: <pbryan@anode.ca>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06C0421F896D for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 13 Mar 2012 08:22:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wqu9AOFowQUq for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 13 Mar 2012 08:22:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from maple.anode.ca (maple.anode.ca [72.14.183.184]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DD6D21F896B for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Tue, 13 Mar 2012 08:22:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.119] (unknown [209.97.219.224]) by maple.anode.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D113C6487 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Tue, 13 Mar 2012 15:22:24 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <1331652143.3301.9.camel@neutron>
From: "Paul C. Bryan" <pbryan@anode.ca>
To: apps-discuss@ietf.org
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2012 08:22:23 -0700
In-Reply-To: <4F5E6E2F.4030503@cloudmark.com>
References: <20120309211833.15339.72914.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <4F5E6E2F.4030503@cloudmark.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=-5SRAR7RT2ba7ua9CeSmk"
X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.2-1
Mime-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] I-D Action: draft-ietf-appsawg-json-pointer-01.txt
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2012 15:22:26 -0000

On Mon, 2012-03-12 at 14:44 -0700, Mike Acar wrote:

> Typo: In section 4,
> 
>      The member name is equal to the token if it has the same number of
>      Unicode characters as token and their codepoints are positionwise
>      equal.
> 
> Need a "the" between "as" and "token".


Thanks, fixed in next revision.


> You removed one "concrete", but should probably remove the next two. 
> Since the section begins with
> 
>      Evaluation of a JSON Pointer begins with a reference to the root
>      value of a JSON text document
> 
> the implication is that you're following the pointer and traversing an 
> existing (concrete) object.
> 
> Actually, I suggest rewriting the paragraph, something like:
> 
>      While evaluating the JSON Pointer, if the implementation does not
>      match the reference token to a member name or array index in the
>      currently-referenced value, then the implementation MAY terminate
>      evaluation with an error condition.
> 
> That said, I'm still concerned that this behavior interacts badly with 
> Pointers as they're used in JSON Patch. I'll follow up in the patch 
> thread, though.


Hmm, okay, we'll need to continue discussing this.

Paul