Re: [Json] Gen-ART and OPS-Dir review of draft-ietf-json-text-sequence-09

[John Cowan <[e-mail]>]

Patrik Fältström scripsit:

> But it also reference RFC7159, which doesn't require UTF-8 but instead
> for some weird reason also allow other encodings of Unicode text. And
> on top of that it says Byte Order Mark is not allowed.

7159 was meant to tighten the wording of 4627, not to impose additional
constraints on it.  For that, see the I-JSON draft.

> This together implies that first of all this draft might not lead to
> stable implementations, secondly one can not store in JSON strings
> that include the Byte Order Mark, and there are other unspecified
> situations.

If by that you mean that a JSON string may not contain U+FEFF, that is
incorrect, for U+FEFF is recognized as a BOM only when placed at the
beginning of an entity body, whereas an entity body in JSON format can
begin only with [ or { classically, or by extension with [0-9"tfn].

-- 
John Cowan          http://www.ccil.org/~cowan        [e-mail]
Micropayment advocates mistakenly believe that efficient allocation of
resources is the purpose of markets.  Efficiency is a byproduct of market
systems, not their goal.  The reasons markets work are not because users
have embraced efficiency but because markets are the best place to allow
users to maximize their preferences, and very often their preferences are
not for conservation of cheap resources.  --Clay Shirky