IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: If not JSON, what then ?

nicolas.mailhot@laposte.net Tue, 02 August 2016 13:15 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request+bounce-httpbisa-archive-bis2juki=lists.ie@listhub.w3.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9C2B12D5B7 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Aug 2016 06:15:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.308
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.308 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.287, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=laposte.net
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JPbsUGk-XZoZ for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Aug 2016 06:15:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4FCB612D5B2 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Tue, 2 Aug 2016 06:15:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1bUZUE-00033Z-Rv for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Tue, 02 Aug 2016 13:11:59 +0000
Resent-Date: Tue, 02 Aug 2016 13:11:58 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1bUZUE-00033Z-Rv@frink.w3.org>
Received: from maggie.w3.org ([128.30.52.39]) by frink.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <nicolas.mailhot@laposte.net>) id 1bUZU8-000315-TC for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Tue, 02 Aug 2016 13:11:53 +0000
Received: from smtpoutz10.laposte.net ([194.117.213.175] helo=smtp.laposte.net) by maggie.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA256:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <nicolas.mailhot@laposte.net>) id 1bUZU3-0004pg-Ey for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Tue, 02 Aug 2016 13:11:51 +0000
Received: from smtp.laposte.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lpn-prd-vrout004 (Postfix) with ESMTP id B669C58E216 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Tue, 2 Aug 2016 15:09:07 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=laposte.net; s=mail0; t=1470143347; bh=0t7UNimnrTv5Ywa6o85B8Em2sioSDPavsZA4jXjSrBw=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject; b=kpSSZYD9Q/rp8xaFVTKD99f27xpK+x1iuBIMCYdcWQmyrKCUMdLjjIrqgEeRhUohT nU3lymsRdOm9gU59SXWOhjn+k75SBQE/kVdeqwDcRKibYaPcceTj7vhoH7BluQiRAZ f0zkjXrAPgmPtNdVrxvnGCIF4UFkEqKwnQi20AxW+ARnPinKmI2Pe9eMbKm5VCo2dQ iE7elmYexmIi5mEoeWNH/g8ZyiuiXgIuJiYqB+XeCZzyWuGeXsKQa0URbX9HKfCXf6 vgfXpylhBCHggyz6xxj5e8K3Xpb0sj7VrJYc8W9LWw3rSN/zdeKZdW16MVk0zu/2Np zk5Euyvnw5X7g==
Received: from smtp.laposte.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lpn-prd-vrout004 (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9AAA859172C for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Tue, 2 Aug 2016 15:09:07 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from lpn-prd-mstr088.laposte (lpn-prd-mstr088 [10.128.59.114]) by lpn-prd-vrout004 (Postfix) with ESMTP id 870B358E216; Tue, 2 Aug 2016 15:09:07 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Tue, 02 Aug 2016 15:09:07 +0200
From: nicolas.mailhot@laposte.net
To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <1144577292.1205680.1470143347451.JavaMail.zimbra@laposte.net>
In-Reply-To: <64082.1470141855@critter.freebsd.dk>
References: <77778.1470037414@critter.freebsd.dk> <7B76F00B-2CAF-42A4-B09C-FA0748A4D025@laposte.net> <52025.1470048651@critter.freebsd.dk> <353202556.1155109.1470141630778.JavaMail.zimbra@laposte.net> <64082.1470141855@critter.freebsd.dk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Originating-IP: [86.67.130.83]
X-Mailer: Zimbra 8.0.6_GA_5922 (ZimbraWebClient - FF48 (Linux)/La Poste)
Thread-Topic: If not JSON, what then ?
Thread-Index: WbwcNKIOFt4i2Gb5IGJdwACaNCYDUA==
X-VR-SrcIP: [86.67.130.83]
X-VR-FullState: 0
X-VR-Score: 0
X-VR-Cause-1: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrfeeltddrjeekgdefhecutefuodetggdotefrodftvfcurfhrohhf
X-VR-Cause-2: ihhlvgemucfntefrqffuvffgnecuuegrihhlohhuthemucehtddtnecunecujfgurhepfffhvffkjghf
X-VR-Cause-3: ufggtgfgihfothesthhqtgdtredtjeenucfhrhhomhepnhhitgholhgrshdrmhgrihhlhhhotheslhgr
X-VR-Cause-4: phhoshhtvgdrnhgvthenucfkphepuddtrdduvdekrdehledruddugedpkeeirdeijedrudeftddrkeef
X-VR-Cause-5: necurfgrrhgrmhepmhhouggvpehsmhhtphhouhhtpdhhvghloheplhhpnhdqphhrugdqmhhsthhrtdek
X-VR-Cause-6: kedrlhgrphhoshhtvgdpihhnvghtpedutddruddvkedrheelrdduudegpdhmrghilhhfrhhomhepnhhi
X-VR-Cause-7: tgholhgrshdrmhgrihhlhhhotheslhgrphhoshhtvgdrnhgvthdprhgtphhtthhopehivghtfhdqhhht
X-VR-Cause-8: thhpqdifghesfiefrdhorhhg
X-VR-AvState: No
X-VR-State: 0
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=194.117.213.175; envelope-from=nicolas.mailhot@laposte.net; helo=smtp.laposte.net
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.2
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: BAYES_50=0.8, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.243, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: maggie.w3.org 1bUZU3-0004pg-Ey f38d61370f439cc3fe467bf9773430b9
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: If not JSON, what then ?
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/1144577292.1205680.1470143347451.JavaMail.zimbra@laposte.net>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/32146
X-Loop: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Resent-Sender: ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ietf-http-wg.w3.org>
List-Help: <http://www.w3.org/Mail/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe>


----- Mail original -----
De: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>


>>I thouroughly mislike all the encoding dance and escaping one time
>>it's UTF-8 another not.

>I think you are barking up another tree than I am.

>I'm trying to find a way to lay down a common structure so people
>dont *have* to break things to get them to work as they do now.

I appreciate the intent (really) but I feel the result of tip-toeing around unicode rules just generates a lot of complexity, makes the general case complex and special cases simple, when it should be the reverse (general case → just UTF-8 with no additional rules, special cases → just use binary)

There are 7 (!) text encoding cases in your proposal

-- 
Nicolas Mailhot

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email