Re: [Json] Normative reference reasoning and logistics

["Matt Miller (mamille2)" <[e-mail]>]

Hello all,

It appears we have rough consensus to include a combination of the following text suggested by Tim Bray:

    The reference to ECMA-404 in the previous sentence is normative,
    not with the usual meaning that implementors need to consult it
    in order to understand this document, but to emphasize that there
    are no inconsistencies in the definition of the term “JSON text”
    in any of its specifications. Note, however, that ECMA-404 allows
    several practices which this specification recommends avoiding in
    the interests of maximal interoperability.

With these additional points suggested by Joe Hildebrand:

    - The intent is that the grammar is the same between the two
      documents, although different descriptions are used.  If there a
      difference is found between them, ECMA and the IETF will work
      together to update both documents.

    - If an error is found with either document, the other should be
      examined to see if it has a similar error, and fixed if possible.

    - If either document is changed in the future, ECMA and the IETF will
      work together to ensure that the two documents stay aligned through
      the change.

If there are no objections, then Tim and Joe can finalize the text and include it with the next revision to draft-ietf-jsonbis-rfc7159bis.


Thank you,

- JSON Chair