Re: [Json] REMINDER - WGLC Ends 2013-10-11

Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com> Fri, 11 October 2013 21:13 UTC

Return-Path: <tbray@textuality.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 C9D2521F9E11 for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 11 Oct 2013 14:13:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.046
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.046 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.070, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, 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 Uk3vSnUDZzOI for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 11 Oct 2013 14:13:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vb0-f51.google.com (mail-vb0-f51.google.com [209.85.212.51]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED22621F9C1D for <json@ietf.org>; Fri, 11 Oct 2013 14:13:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-vb0-f51.google.com with SMTP id x16so3236390vbf.10 for <json@ietf.org>; Fri, 11 Oct 2013 14:13:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=SBFkqnViFyDqaXQXFJ7LBAP7BrnOe1ba7It1TaWClKc=; b=l+mk4Mb1/VGpFLuGnub9gBVdO6XE6z8q1QDmP9hR6ZlHo9hdWvOg406wsXUGFuTH1u uLYvtBCeV8rZZMhaAHr60+zkUiBB6wFyGPKcp0aW0R42ezV57AIxxbgjvwYLDKgDEosW InKrJWdENRsWoPpxIx6gN5HkAEPDQqKpwYA4HONNqEKXdG8V8IQwsCzqLaSC8cKkk8WW SbA14FUZZNcFOLiMIQmTrKl45yhrB10Dhly/UpvyR4uKrIwUOICAMOj/hrIMliY/53dT QQvhCvIuaGNqIzjK4HsI3WT+0U66LivLN/8RakRNnpfSJUwaxUiH3OxAq6vSwUaJL4l9 7HRw==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmdTncLhCmn0qUWXbGxcFzKN/IgOMGlNNCmVkp40ZwrSeCRn/gby/DuSnSfhcik7c7EJLlC
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.220.183.199 with SMTP id ch7mr18840791vcb.27.1381525984386; Fri, 11 Oct 2013 14:13:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.220.174.197 with HTTP; Fri, 11 Oct 2013 14:13:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Originating-IP: [96.49.81.176]
In-Reply-To: <078c01cec6c5$d19fc990$74df5cb0$@augustcellars.com>
References: <BF7E36B9C495A6468E8EC573603ED9411EF4E2DB@xmb-aln-x11.cisco.com> <078c01cec6c5$d19fc990$74df5cb0$@augustcellars.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2013 14:13:04 -0700
Message-ID: <CAHBU6isu_hfkvsy37AcvgS9dXbhg8C9MBQ8W86RMpn+ypB=apw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
To: Jim Schaad <ietf@augustcellars.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c1bce08c33bb04e87d95cd
Cc: JSON WG <json@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Json] REMINDER - WGLC Ends 2013-10-11
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: Fri, 11 Oct 2013 21:13:09 -0000

On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 2:06 PM, Jim Schaad <ietf@augustcellars.com> wrote:

>
> 1.  It seems odd in Section 1 that a value is defined for object, but it is
> not for array.  It might be better to move the definition of value in the
> paragraph of what JSON can represent so it does not appear to be special
> for
> object.
>

Don’t get it, which para is that?  I’m looking at instances of “value” in
Section 1 and not seeing it.


>
> 2.  In section 1.2, My reading of the following text ||"Hello world!",
> "42",
> and "true"|| is that there are three strings here, but I think it was
> supposed to represent a string, an number and a Boolean.  I am not sure how
> to make this clearer, but killing the quotes on the last two items might be
> reasonable.
>

Yep, done.


>
> 3.  It seems a bit odd to title section 2 "Grammar" when it does not have
> the entire grammar.  It also seems odd that the introduction paragraph
> talks
> about things which are not in this section, but are in the following
> sections.
>

Yeah,  the title should be “Tokens” or some such, but it’s survived all
these years without causing breakage, I think we can live with it.


>
> 4.  The following is technically a change in the grammar, however is there
> a
> reason why an integer cannot be 00, but 1E00 is legal?  Do we want to
> change
> the definition of the exponent so that it matches that of integer?
>

Eeeek, please no.



> 5.  There has been mention that one reason for using ABNF is that it can be
> machine consumable, does it make any sense to create an appendix which has
> the full grammar in it for simplicity of reference?
>

Evidence suggests that people have no trouble constructing JSON parsers, so
probably not a huge ROI here.


>
> _______________________________________________
> json mailing list
> json@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/json
>