Re: [Json] On representing what ECMA wants

Mark Miller <erights@gmail.com> Wed, 19 June 2013 03:39 UTC

Return-Path: <erights@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71A4821E80B7 for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 20:39:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.765
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.765 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.833, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 ukdkhz+oPTPl for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 20:39:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vc0-f169.google.com (mail-vc0-f169.google.com [209.85.220.169]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BDCA21E8056 for <json@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 20:39:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-vc0-f169.google.com with SMTP id ia10so3494913vcb.28 for <json@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 20:39:43 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=/Rd8A2AR8Xl1xUrlFYNoTmO33eW8pA+vq/p4/Bdx52c=; b=04s1fQbn61NKsGEbAjtG/sWuEZHxiRBlw2UpX3P9tiMRScGOLlcGlYkJY46/D34lL1 Gb5fCDnh0Q6hxNVXRDgN5PgV2Jc0hrqJRGphTSLtB5Z/Tw/PIkV0QQBtajER6tsxLNS0 DGTabm/xVYycBGSzry7gkhr/oLt0TSaGuFFExM3ccUtyEsiin9dl2CzHrQ4YD/ijHvNu sF3CZ28kwlUvqRoMjb0Cfwb9M+6czLZ7lNVdCPCwLuThIKHD2hirspjDyDf3t526lEnl ufBSJijVaaQy6Aqz6lQ7QUhy/1eHiin3PYSS+c8Xsq5ff8SMmDpCrvHOqyyMyCQSJUBy 3lYA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.58.182.103 with SMTP id ed7mr339016vec.70.1371613183669; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 20:39:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.52.0.202 with HTTP; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 20:39:43 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAHfnhfqyVL3n03y=UPa98MaFXjA4tLwFF9VLesaRL_7KNdg=4g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <51B9EA49.2050604@crockford.com> <BF7E36B9C495A6468E8EC573603ED9411528A0E2@xmb-aln-x11.cisco.com> <51C1121E.8050004@crockford.com> <C9893DB6-027A-409C-92F2-A267FFE64BAA@vpnc.org> <CAHfnhfqyVL3n03y=UPa98MaFXjA4tLwFF9VLesaRL_7KNdg=4g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 20:39:43 -0700
Message-ID: <CAK5yZYhsLhzsWF7P-NXUVZZtxzA2tO+y9httZQzCmOmvLzg0wg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Mark Miller <erights@gmail.com>
To: Rick Waldron <waldron.rick@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b676e1c9500ce04df7994d8
Cc: "json@ietf.org" <json@ietf.org>, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>, Douglas Crockford <douglas@crockford.com>, es-discuss <es-discuss@mozilla.org>
Subject: Re: [Json] On representing what ECMA wants
X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\) WG mailing list" <json.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/json>, <mailto:json-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/json>
List-Post: <mailto:json@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:json-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/json>, <mailto:json-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 03:39:50 -0000

On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 8:22 PM, Rick Waldron <waldron.rick@gmail.com>wrote;wrote:

> cc es-discuss
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 11:01 PM, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>wrote;wrote:
>
>> <two chair hats on>
>>
>> On Jun 18, 2013, at 7:06 PM, Douglas Crockford <douglas@crockford.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > I think this is the standard that ECMA wants to publish.
>>
>> As you know from our earlier off-list discussions, you do not represent
>> ECMA, nor even TC39, to the IETF, nor even to this WG. Everyone from TC39
>> represents themselves here. Your statement above still implies authority
>> that doesn't exist.
>>
>
Hi Paul, I'm missing all the context, but from this out of context
fragment, your response seems inappropriate. A statement like Doug's "I
think this is the standard that ECMA wants to publish" sounds to me like
speculation on how TC39 will react to some proposed standard. Whether
coming from someone on TC39 or not, I do not see that any assertion of
authority is involved. Here on es-discuss, both members and non-members of
TC39 speculate and argue all the time on what kinds of things TC39 might
approve of. Member of TC39 participate in these discussions, not to speak
for TC39 as a whole, but to speak a) for themselves as participants in
TC39, and b) as someone who is more informed than most, but still fallible,
speculating about howTC39 might react to something. Perhaps this line gets
blurry sometimes, but a statement like "I think this is the standard that
ECMA wants to publish" seems to me clearly on the non-blurry side of that
line.

If the context changes how all this would be interpreted, my apologies.


>
>> ECMA and TC39 leadership has had, and probably will continue to have,
>> discussions about whether ECMA wants to have an official position on what
>> they want to see from the IETF. Until we hear that from those higher-ups,
>> no one speaks for ECMA here (and no one speaks for the IETF in TC39).
>> Please try harder to refrain from suggesting that particular technical or
>> process decisions would be what ECMA wants. Thanks in advance.
>>
>> --Matt and Paul
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> json mailing list
>> json@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/json
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> es-discuss mailing list
> es-discuss@mozilla.org
> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
>
>


-- 
Text by me above is hereby placed in the public domain

  Cheers,
  --MarkM