[apps-discuss] Fw: draft-pbryan-zyp-json-pointer: name syntax for non-ASCII
"t.petch" <ietfc@btconnect.com> Thu, 24 November 2011 18:16 UTC
Return-Path: <ietfc@btconnect.com>
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 07B1D21F8B5E for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 24 Nov 2011 10:16:19 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.329
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.329 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.270, BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 1l4R4CMyyKy0 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 24 Nov 2011 10:16:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.btconnect.com (c2bthomr14.btconnect.com [213.123.20.132]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A09E21F8B53 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Thu, 24 Nov 2011 10:16:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from host86-177-208-97.range86-177.btcentralplus.com (HELO pc6) ([86.177.208.97]) by c2bthomr14.btconnect.com with SMTP id FGY85532; Thu, 24 Nov 2011 18:13:36 +0000 (GMT)
Message-ID: <092801ccaacc$ada7b000$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net>
From: "t.petch" <ietfc@btconnect.com>
To: apps-discuss <apps-discuss@ietf.org>
Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2011 18:15:30 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
X-Mirapoint-IP-Reputation: reputation=Fair-1, source=Queried, refid=tid=0001.0A0B0303.4ECE894F.005C, actions=tag
X-Junkmail-Premium-Raw: score=9/50, refid=2.7.2:2011.11.24.173314:17:9.535, ip=86.177.208.97, rules=__HAS_MSGID, __OUTLOOK_MSGID_1, __SANE_MSGID, __TO_MALFORMED_2, __BOUNCE_NDR_SUBJ_EXEMPT, __MIME_VERSION, __CT, CT_TP_8859_1, __CT_TEXT_PLAIN, __CTE, __HAS_X_PRIORITY, __HAS_MSMAIL_PRI, __HAS_X_MAILER, USER_AGENT_OE, __OUTLOOK_MUA_1, __USER_AGENT_MS_GENERIC, TO_IN_SUBJECT, __ANY_URI, __CP_URI_IN_BODY, BODY_SIZE_5000_5999, __MIME_TEXT_ONLY, RDNS_GENERIC_POOLED, RDNS_SUSP_GENERIC, __OUTLOOK_MUA, RDNS_SUSP, BODY_SIZE_7000_LESS
X-Junkmail-Status: score=10/50, host=c2bthomr14.btconnect.com
X-Junkmail-Signature-Raw: score=unknown, refid=str=0001.0A0B0207.4ECE89EF.01B4, ss=1, fgs=0, ip=0.0.0.0, so=2010-07-22 22:03:31, dmn=2009-09-10 00:05:08, mode=multiengine
X-Junkmail-IWF: false
Subject: [apps-discuss] Fw: draft-pbryan-zyp-json-pointer: name syntax for non-ASCII
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: Thu, 24 Nov 2011 18:16:19 -0000
---- Original Message ----- From: "Graham Klyne" <GK@ninebynine.org> To: "Martin J. Dürst" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp> Cc: "Mark Nottingham" <mnot@mnot.net>; "IETF Apps Discuss" <apps-discuss@ietf.org> Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2011 12:26 PM > I spotted this discussion and was reminded that one of the older URI specs had > some explicit discussion of characters and octets and encoding. I recall a line > that looked something like this: > > URI characters -> URI octets -> URI octets %-encoded to US-ASCII > > but I can no longer find it (quickly). But http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3986.txt > sections 1.2 and section 2 (esp. intro) address some of the issues. The point > being that character encoding to octets is a separate concern from %-encoding to > URI (or IRI) on-the-wire characters. > My bible for this is RFC2130 which gives character->coded character set->character encoding scheme->transfer encoding syntax which Unicode seemed to get spot on, but HTML and URIs ... um Tom Petch <resent - where did apps-discuss@ietf.org go? > > > #g > -- > > On 22/11/2011 09:09, "Martin J. Dürst" wrote: > > On 2011/11/22 8:43, Mark Nottingham wrote: > >> The usual approach to this sort of thing is to define the "canonical" way to > >> do it; i.e., json pointers *are* unicode strings; then you can define > >> encodings into various environments (like URIs). > >> > >> In this case, it'd probably be good enough to say that json pointers are > >> unicode strings, > > > > Up to here, this makes a ton of sense. > > > >> but that when they need to be in ASCII environments (like URIs) they get > >> UTF-8'ed and then percent-escaped. > > > > This would mean that e.g. in a Java program that for some reason is kept in > > US-ASCII, I'd have to use %-encoding. This doesn't make sense to me at all. > > > > So I'd say that json pointers are escaped according to the conventions of the > > substrate that carries them when needed (e.g. pure ASCII, or other kinds of > > encodings that can't handle the whole Unicode range). > > > > Then for json pointers as fragment identifiers, I'd mention that where > necessary > > (e.g. for URIs), the convention for converting from IRIs to URIs (see RFC > 3987) > > applies. > > > > By the way, I don't see a need to escape "/" at all in a fragment identifier. > > "/" is plain and simply allowed in fragment identifiers. Please see > > http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986#section-3.5. Of course, it's not forbidden > to > > escape "/", so software that is interpreting a fragment identifier has to make > > sure it does the right thing. > > > > Regards, Martin. > > > > > >> Cheers, > >> > >> > >> On 22/11/2011, at 8:51 AM, Paul C. Bryan wrote: > >> > >>> Okay, so I'll write-up separate sections for JSON string values and URI > >>> fragment identifiers. Any objections? > >>> > >>> Paul > >>> > >>> On Tue, 2011-11-22 at 07:55 +1100, Mark Nottingham wrote: > >>>> +1 to Julian here -- there's no reason why non-ASCII chars need to be > >>>> percent-encoded when they occur inside a JSON document, only when they're > in > >>>> a URI (or similar context). > >>>> > >>>> Cheers, > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On 22/11/2011, at 7:12 AM, Julian Reschke wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> On 2011-11-21 21:09, Paul C. Bryan wrote: > >>>>>> The intent is to allow a JSON Pointer to be expressed as a JSON string > >>>>>> value as well as a URI fragment identifier. The latter is the most > >>>>>> significant driver for URI percent-encoding. > >>>>>> ... > >>>>> > >>>>> Well, you could use it as fragment identifier (or otherwise URI component) > >>>>> by UTF-8-percent-escaping. > >>>>> > >>>>> The question is whether that use case requires them to be all ASCII every > >>>>> else, such as in a JSON patch document. > >>>>> > >>>>> Best regards, Julian > >>>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>>> apps-discuss mailing list > >>>>> > >>>> apps-discuss@ietf.org > >>>> > >>>>> > >>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> -- > >>>> Mark Nottingham > >>>> http://www.mnot.net/ > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> apps-discuss mailing list > >>> apps-discuss@ietf.org > >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss > >> > >> -- > >> Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/ > >> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> apps-discuss mailing list > >> apps-discuss@ietf.org > >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss > >> > > _______________________________________________ > > apps-discuss mailing list > > apps-discuss@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss > > > _______________________________________________ > apps-discuss mailing list > apps-discuss@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss > >
- Re: [apps-discuss] draft-pbryan-zyp-json-pointer:… Paul C. Bryan
- [apps-discuss] draft-pbryan-zyp-json-pointer: nam… Julian Reschke
- Re: [apps-discuss] draft-pbryan-zyp-json-pointer:… Bjoern Hoehrmann
- Re: [apps-discuss] draft-pbryan-zyp-json-pointer:… Julian Reschke
- Re: [apps-discuss] draft-pbryan-zyp-json-pointer:… Paul C. Bryan
- Re: [apps-discuss] draft-pbryan-zyp-json-pointer:… Paul C. Bryan
- Re: [apps-discuss] draft-pbryan-zyp-json-pointer:… Julian Reschke
- Re: [apps-discuss] draft-pbryan-zyp-json-pointer:… Julian Reschke
- Re: [apps-discuss] draft-pbryan-zyp-json-pointer:… Bjoern Hoehrmann
- Re: [apps-discuss] draft-pbryan-zyp-json-pointer:… Paul C. Bryan
- Re: [apps-discuss] draft-pbryan-zyp-json-pointer:… Frank Ellermann
- Re: [apps-discuss] draft-pbryan-zyp-json-pointer:… Julian Reschke
- Re: [apps-discuss] draft-pbryan-zyp-json-pointer:… Paul C. Bryan
- Re: [apps-discuss] draft-pbryan-zyp-json-pointer:… Mark Nottingham
- Re: [apps-discuss] draft-pbryan-zyp-json-pointer:… Paul C. Bryan
- Re: [apps-discuss] draft-pbryan-zyp-json-pointer:… Mark Nottingham
- Re: [apps-discuss] draft-pbryan-zyp-json-pointer:… Paul C. Bryan
- Re: [apps-discuss] draft-pbryan-zyp-json-pointer:… Paul C. Bryan
- Re: [apps-discuss] draft-pbryan-zyp-json-pointer:… Martin J. Dürst
- Re: [apps-discuss] draft-pbryan-zyp-json-pointer:… Julian Reschke
- Re: [apps-discuss] draft-pbryan-zyp-json-pointer:… Carsten Bormann
- Re: [apps-discuss] draft-pbryan-zyp-json-pointer:… Graham Klyne
- Re: [apps-discuss] draft-pbryan-zyp-json-pointer:… Julian Reschke
- Re: [apps-discuss] draft-pbryan-zyp-json-pointer:… Martin Thomson
- Re: [apps-discuss] draft-pbryan-zyp-json-pointer:… Julian Reschke
- Re: [apps-discuss] draft-pbryan-zyp-json-pointer:… Julian Reschke
- Re: [apps-discuss] draft-pbryan-zyp-json-pointer:… Paul C. Bryan
- Re: [apps-discuss] draft-pbryan-zyp-json-pointer:… Carsten Bormann
- Re: [apps-discuss] draft-pbryan-zyp-json-pointer:… Martin Thomson
- Re: [apps-discuss] draft-pbryan-zyp-json-pointer:… Martin J. Dürst
- Re: [apps-discuss] draft-pbryan-zyp-json-pointer:… Paul C. Bryan
- [apps-discuss] Fw: draft-pbryan-zyp-json-pointer:… t.petch
- Re: [apps-discuss] Fw: draft-pbryan-zyp-json-poin… Martin J. Dürst
- [apps-discuss] draft-pbryan-zyp-json-pointer prog… Julian Reschke
- Re: [apps-discuss] draft-pbryan-zyp-json-pointer … Paul C. Bryan
- Re: [apps-discuss] draft-pbryan-zyp-json-pointer … Julian Reschke