Re: [Json] Nudging the English-language vs. formalisms discussion forward

Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com> Wed, 19 February 2014 15:49 UTC

Return-Path: <tbray@textuality.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 CEFA51A01D5 for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 19 Feb 2014 07:49:43 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.977
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham
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 OxqinQi9Psnt for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 19 Feb 2014 07:49:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-vc0-f176.google.com (mail-vc0-f176.google.com [209.85.220.176]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2850D1A0324 for <json@ietf.org>; Wed, 19 Feb 2014 07:49:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-vc0-f176.google.com with SMTP id la4so563430vcb.21 for <json@ietf.org>; Wed, 19 Feb 2014 07:49:07 -0800 (PST)
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=bokxqedkMGSccuXB+MePph+Z/EwxzsnzLjnDhctF7ec=; b=lRG+DGRJDJuSaim7WPjQnsdPv2uv2v4biMSnku9oKtPP/WzksYQqX5sC6/8PJpUucp EQcotmvkcEdI4ZCD63I3OtHYBrZOtkd2HWx8823VeHcKNusonn8kiR234o3aTWT1Xp1y s2thIId4eC3wHbLutG4jNK/W7sHDN/IA6+1RK2GWgEBbnDqwabzQl+Kuhdo2CJkAIQBt pD2rQ9jY2h6ikCnU4Wf/D2CKe31X3dROnwXQt4QwmddFf8tpR10yfMSob5QvRSLx9HBR OyC7ykGXOvrwqRXmJG8vEgxFpkY3x85eakZBdxiR/UxRVNyHeTbY9cidXGDlXtnevkL9 qfCw==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmwP2zVdhGF+Q27nB8QX0K/RoK6SOEzRn2uUBDzzjW/tMJHC6EopwOy9+ZjmvjrQNSxVOGr
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.221.66.73 with SMTP id xp9mr21657487vcb.27.1392824947706; Wed, 19 Feb 2014 07:49:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.220.98.73 with HTTP; Wed, 19 Feb 2014 07:49:07 -0800 (PST)
X-Originating-IP: [24.84.235.32]
In-Reply-To: <C87F9B96-E028-4F0E-A950-B39D3F68FFE7@vpnc.org>
References: <C87F9B96-E028-4F0E-A950-B39D3F68FFE7@vpnc.org>
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2014 07:49:07 -0800
Message-ID: <CAHBU6isZS+Q=2qp8=pGMeDePrOLai9j5uxdws5SttssbRjXiQA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
To: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113642e63e207b04f2c454da
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/json/57ZHG-mynnEEhXQRqbeMzfkPRBU
Cc: JSON WG <json@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Json] Nudging the English-language vs. formalisms discussion forward
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: <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 Feb 2014 15:49:44 -0000

For the record, I think the draft language is clear and correct and we
should move forward with it.


On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 7:31 AM, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org> wrote:

> [[ Phill is the only one who has responded with a proposal to speak.
> Hearing whether others want to would be useful. --Paul Hoffman ]]
>
> It's been a week, and yet I can't imagine that everything has been said
> with respect to our proposed charter item that now stands at:
>
>   A set of natural-language terms and/or phrases for use in future
> specifications
>   that use JSON. This explicitly excludes schema languages and similar
> formalisms.
>
> After that, a bunch of people started talking about formalisms and actual
> schemas again. In order to get this decided, we need more discussion and
> then agreement. To that end, and to put our 90 minutes on Friday afternoon
> in London to best use, I will ask for at least three people to present
> their views in 10-minute presentations at the meeting. However, in order to
> cause this to not be the normal IETF "let's wait for the meeting" game, the
> presentations need to be done by next Monday, Feb. 24. That gives people on
> the list a preview of what will be said, time to argue about it, and time
> for the presenters to hone their slides if they want.
>
> Let me know online or offline if you want to do a presentation. If you're
> not going to be at the meeting but want to say something, you need to find
> some like-minded soul with whom to work on the presentation.
>
> --Paul Hoffman
> _______________________________________________
> json mailing list
> json@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/json
>
> _______________________________________________
> json mailing list
> json@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/json
>