Re: [Gen-art] [Jsonpath] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-jsonpath-base-17

[Carsten Bormann <[e-mail]>]

On 10. Aug 2023, at 20:18, Linda Dunbar via Datatracker <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> The major issue is that this document should not be “Standard Track” […]

Others have already gone into the details why this very much should be a standards-track document.

Let me just add another data point:

We already have a standards-track document that solves a similar problem (identifying individual values within JSON values, i.e., parsed JSON texts), RFC 6901 (JSON Pointer).
This is in wide use, also within other IETF standards-track specification.
Datatracker finds 13 IETF documents and RFCs with normative references (including JSON Patch, JMAP, and JSCalendar) and 8 documents with informative references.

Appendix C to the JSONPath document reviewed here explains how JSON Pointer and JSONPath are related [1]:

>> JSONPath is not intended as a replacement for, but as a more powerful companion to, JSON Pointer [RFC6901]. The purposes of the two standards are different.
>> JSON Pointer is for identifying a single value within a JSON value whose structure is known.
>> JSONPath can […] extract […] values from JSON values whose structure is known only in a general way.

… and goes on to discuss conversion between the two.

The JSONPath specification not only will bring a common standardized base to the 40+ implementations of JSONPath, it will also be used within our standards-track specifications, both as a tool for expressing them and as a format for interchange of information for more powerful JSON value extraction.

Grüße, Carsten

[1]: https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-jsonpath-base-17.html#name-json-pointer