Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-json-i-json-05

[Tim Bray <[e-mail]>]

<editor-hat>

On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 1:00 AM, Meral Shirazipour <
[e-mail]> wrote:

>  Nits/editorial comments:
>
>  -Please spell out acronyms at first use. E.g. JSON, I-JSON
>

​I disagree.  People know what JSON stands for, and for those who don’t
spelling it out wouldn’t help.  De facto, the name of the format is JSON.
Also, the mention of JavaScript is a red herring.​

-[Page 3], "treat an integer", it would be good to mention this is still
> referring to IEEE754 format.
>

​I disagree.  It’s talking about the sequence of digits in the I-JSON text,
irrespective of any binary format.​
​

>
>
> -[Page 3],"(one example would be 64-bit integers)", here not clear if
> still IEEE7544 is discussed or integer format. If latter, is it
> signed/unsigned.
>
> "RECOMMENDED to encode them in JSON string values." should this be done in
> decimal format then?
>

​I think this has been discussed elsewhere on teh thread.  It’s irritating
that 64-bit integers would be string-encoded even though most computers can
handle them in hardware, but it is a real plus for interoperability.
Anyhow, the place where this advice really applies is for​ huge crypto
integers.


>
> -[Page 4], Section 3, "in the JSON messages it receives."--->"in the JSON
> messages they receives."
>

​er, “er, they receive’. Yup.  ​

​​

> ​​
> -[Page 4], "receiving implementation"---->"receiving implementations"
>
>
​Yup.​

​​


>
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Meral
>
> ---
>
> Meral Shirazipour
>
> Ericsson
>
> Research
>
> www.ericsson.com
>



-- 
- Tim Bray (If you’d like to send me a private message, see
https://keybase.io/timbray)