[Json] Fwd: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC6902 (4460)

Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org> Sat, 29 August 2015 13:54 UTC

Return-Path: <barryleiba@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85EE51B2DD0 for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 29 Aug 2015 06:54:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.278
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.278 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
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 ktPdBQjT0rdS for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 29 Aug 2015 06:54:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vk0-x22a.google.com (mail-vk0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c05::22a]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 028741B2A75 for <json@ietf.org>; Sat, 29 Aug 2015 06:54:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by vkaw128 with SMTP id w128so20769735vka.2 for <json@ietf.org>; Sat, 29 Aug 2015 06:54:15 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:content-type; bh=MNh7JShiNQgJpDNZboSGK9LrQUKfF8YaCd8Y5A/Owio=; b=tQ+huvWPOPBOEBm0tC2tYGAdFbrGbZKYi/z56iOLtPycVpAWxL7XbkAaG7oeQSpVct cypz3hA46Yj3hcQw2Uhxd8VTfzjQYlzqgGMUzkr9tRE7EzDBjxD5Bka5k7r9i8b+YIed v0vxDM+Njwu4ZitaYTS5t4/Rjf8hRefsZ6u7kkKNkVEdNK9xYpHcAvlINPp920rviDGS klZI6iFMRM1YVeKoY3yJ4R4i5S8Gl5Aisxi0suZvtSBdkdiN4fXOdeMs6uLtSg95gV7Q xJn5Tsn7EaFe+FiUal57c3vvduMf7/h6nMzWwv1g8ielq/upKB2bMG4e6kb7nuUZls4x svGw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.52.156.106 with SMTP id wd10mr12423144vdb.64.1440856455266; Sat, 29 Aug 2015 06:54:15 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: barryleiba@gmail.com
Received: by 10.31.88.196 with HTTP; Sat, 29 Aug 2015 06:54:15 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CALaySJLEwoV0Tu6iGkLKfdPf=wCZsVwOs=F8iqikGsF7GH54Fw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20150829094148.9D27F180478@rfc-editor.org> <CALaySJLEwoV0Tu6iGkLKfdPf=wCZsVwOs=F8iqikGsF7GH54Fw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 2015 09:54:15 -0400
X-Google-Sender-Auth: 2dqwA4DJIQfs5Mhc7Nkskwd4QY4
Message-ID: <CALaySJJJ8Y_4yrZ1Cpxy7fHQLFfM4-ibSuNsfDWnw4xT9T6uvA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
To: "json@ietf.org" <json@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/json/3KFEuzLUbNmuqtLc25GSP2OrkRM>
Subject: [Json] Fwd: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC6902 (4460)
X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Sat, 29 Aug 2015 13:54:17 -0000

Forwarding this to the JSON list so it's in the archive.  No action required.

Barry

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
Date: Sat, Aug 29, 2015 at 9:52 AM
Subject: Re: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC6902 (4460)
To: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Cc: Jamie Nelson <pbryan@anode.ca>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>,
Murray Kucherawy <superuser@gmail.com>, Alexey Melnikov
<alexey.melnikov@isode.com>, hairmare@purplehaze.ch, Apps Discuss
<apps-discuss@ietf.org>


Thanks for the comment, Lucas.  The errata report has been posted to
the apps-discuss list, and I'm going to forward it to the json mailing
list so it's recorded there for future reference.  The errata system,
though, isn't meant for suggestions, but for recording actual errors
in the documents -- so I'm going to mark this "rejected" with a
comment that the suggestion should be consider if a new version of the
document is done.

Barry, ART AD

On Sat, Aug 29, 2015 at 5:41 AM, RFC Errata System
<rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> wrote:
> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC6902,
> "JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Patch".
>
> --------------------------------------
> You may review the report below and at:
> http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=6902&eid=4460
>
> --------------------------------------
> Type: Editorial
> Reported by: Lucas Bickel <hairmare@purplehaze.ch>
>
> Section: 4.1
>
> Original Text
> -------------
>    However, the object itself or an array containing it does need to
>    exist, and it remains an error for that not to be the case.  For
>    example, an "add" with a target location of "/a/b" starting with this
>    document:
>
>    { "a": { "foo": 1 } }
>
>    is not an error, because "a" exists, and "b" will be added to its
>    value.  It is an error in this document:
>
>    { "q": { "bar": 2 } }
>
>    because "a" does not exist.
>
> Corrected Text
> --------------
>    However, the object itself or an array containing it does need to
>    exist, and it remains an error for that not to be the case.  For
>    example, an "add" with a target location of "/a/b" starting with this
>    document:
>
>    { "a": { "foo": 1 } }
>
>    is not an error, because "a" exists, and "b" will be added to its
>    value.  It is an error in this document:
>
>    { "q": { "bar": 2 } }
>
>    because "a" does not exist. Considering a target location of "/a/1"
>    it should be not be an error in this document:
>
>     { "a": [ "foo" ] }
>
>     while the same "add" into this document will be an error:
>
>     { "a": [ ] }
>
>     because "/a/0" does not exist.
>
>
>
>
> Notes
> -----
> Adding to an object has such a nice example that explains the error cases. I think adding to a sequential array should have one as well.
>
> To my understanding this is already pretty clear from RFC6901, I feel it will make the spec easier to implement if we have an example right here.
>
> Instructions:
> -------------
> This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please
> use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or
> rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party (IESG)
> can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary.
>
> --------------------------------------
> RFC6902 (draft-ietf-appsawg-json-patch-10)
> --------------------------------------
> Title               : JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Patch
> Publication Date    : April 2013
> Author(s)           : P. Bryan, Ed., M. Nottingham, Ed.
> Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
> Source              : Applications Area Working Group APP
> Area                : Applications
> Stream              : IETF
> Verifying Party     : IESG
>