IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [apps-discuss] [Json] JSON mailing list and BoF

Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> Tue, 19 February 2013 16:39 UTC

Return-Path: <cabo@tzi.org>
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 D2B7421F8DF4; Tue, 19 Feb 2013 08:39:21 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.249
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.249 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OElAZYuL1P5X; Tue, 19 Feb 2013 08:39:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from informatik.uni-bremen.de (mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de [IPv6:2001:638:708:30c9::12]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B7C121F8C17; Tue, 19 Feb 2013 08:39:20 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at informatik.uni-bremen.de
Received: from smtp-fb3.informatik.uni-bremen.de (smtp-fb3.informatik.uni-bremen.de [134.102.224.120]) by informatik.uni-bremen.de (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id r1JGdCKB020547; Tue, 19 Feb 2013 17:39:12 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [10.0.1.4] (reingewinn.informatik.uni-bremen.de [134.102.218.123]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-fb3.informatik.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E31BE317C; Tue, 19 Feb 2013 17:39:11 +0100 (CET)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.2 \(1499\))
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
From: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
In-Reply-To: <A723FC6ECC552A4D8C8249D9E07425A70F8950CF@xmb-rcd-x10.cisco.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2013 17:39:11 +0100
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <7EB82E7A-F664-46F8-8137-83DF0C3F5536@tzi.org>
References: <A723FC6ECC552A4D8C8249D9E07425A70F8950CF@xmb-rcd-x10.cisco.com>
To: "Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr)" <jhildebr@cisco.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1499)
Cc: "apps-discuss@ietf.org" <apps-discuss@ietf.org>, "json@ietf.org" <json@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] [Json] JSON mailing list and BoF
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, 19 Feb 2013 16:39:21 -0000

On Feb 19, 2013, at 00:47, "Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr)" <jhildebr@cisco.com> wrote:

> As an individual, I'm +1 on that.  I love msgpack, and don't mind the
> addition of UTF8 as a separate type.  Was frsyuki involved in the draft,
> or at least know that it happened?

I tried to involve him.
Frsyuki doesn't like what I did with the binary strings vs. UTF-8, though.

I didn't quite catch whether he is just focusing on maintaining compatibility with what's out there (today's msgpack) or whether he really doesn't see why that is a good idea.
(For me, maintaining 100 % compatibility won't work anyway, because in the end that won't be the only change we'll want to make.  
If we look a bit outside the space that msgpack is being applied to today, we might want to support, say, 16-bit floating point.)

Grüße, Carsten

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email