IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Json] Call for WG Consensus on Whether or Not to Adopt Nomenclature Document(s) in the Charter

Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com> Sat, 15 March 2014 00:57 UTC

Return-Path: <nico@cryptonector.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 944961A0238 for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 14 Mar 2014 17:57:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.044
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.044 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334] 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 apOC2mBNXS0l for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 14 Mar 2014 17:57:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from homiemail-a104.g.dreamhost.com (agjbgdcfdbeb.dreamhost.com [69.163.253.141]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C84E31A0227 for <json@ietf.org>; Fri, 14 Mar 2014 17:57:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from homiemail-a104.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by homiemail-a104.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E74692005D108 for <json@ietf.org>; Fri, 14 Mar 2014 17:56:57 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=cryptonector.com; h= mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from :to:cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s= cryptonector.com; bh=TOjoGUwKFWWVVCnp22tWlwgCJ9s=; b=Ya9LM1rGWrP sToXZYE77Rlf5rEE6CJWCCvx8FFB9kRhcT/JoyK/AF3e0FVbwNKvOVwYL6xWehPO LRjqVn5Sd78f1JNvA241QNOB5GbsA3f7dzTHdmJWhIR8RkB0buiS5xylmBysJH+b /e2tj4ilr0NRDxZrb1rgNcsZ5EJGHWxk=
Received: from mail-we0-f169.google.com (mail-we0-f169.google.com [74.125.82.169]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: nico@cryptonector.com) by homiemail-a104.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9CDEB2005D105 for <json@ietf.org>; Fri, 14 Mar 2014 17:56:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-we0-f169.google.com with SMTP id w62so2776114wes.14 for <json@ietf.org>; Fri, 14 Mar 2014 17:56:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=hoFPMWV2ptkREl0yS1kD1/yqsu/C2Wox6bmpSHbCc00=; b=Nx9Hk8lviAjjbDPgTBkerg8UkHoQ7GqxYy8v7YWPSMSPBrAcXQD2LBi6yohfjNI62n F9qHGtSQB61LqHBIsrtpqYVVZs429GGmOefd6NlqMP5Cw8GYsT7fzI5jdeCghVbZEB1r 6N3SsYFzsElOlLM+OjhZQVKX7FuOenYDUQfWy6vkyvcJfm+F6PZApm5y3UamTgMFI/hp U1fozJML4tOxaLmGZLATe1m76Y+7E294KG3LuT3L6vnhsQfyYDY4gO1kHR9fYLwDAt6m dplSJqk2VY5PyfqjDYrJD3DCUAdTz8POHdoFCF3Qt/WScV1TjMO0WwGQySy6/lcA5lUx vuaQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.180.102.42 with SMTP id fl10mr652530wib.42.1394845016534; Fri, 14 Mar 2014 17:56:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.216.199.6 with HTTP; Fri, 14 Mar 2014 17:56:56 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAMm+Lwi6Ha0r55vb3VNsgz40Bds6HYZ-aM9u-JwyVmoRDuZaWw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <53238F2E.5010105@cisco.com> <CAHBU6itv0q7ZTrran+dKTcUxoSxNHYnND7yLmSPF35--iUMA+w@mail.gmail.com> <CAMm+Lwi6Ha0r55vb3VNsgz40Bds6HYZ-aM9u-JwyVmoRDuZaWw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2014 19:56:56 -0500
Message-ID: <CAK3OfOirBzUA4_FD08FGEuhuTWuG8wz_AF7emVcM=UMTh5SGcw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>
To: Phillip Hallam-Baker <hallam@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/json/5sHgK9ZRsnojJ45nWepHwx6NAzE
Cc: Matt Miller <mamille2@cisco.com>, Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>, IETF JSON WG <json@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Json] Call for WG Consensus on Whether or Not to Adopt Nomenclature Document(s) in the Charter
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: Sat, 15 Mar 2014 00:57:05 -0000

On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 7:30 PM, Phillip Hallam-Baker <hallam@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 7:27 PM, Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com> wrote:
>> I’m generally opposed to this work item on the basis that nobody has
>> provided an example of an existing RFC that would clearly be improved by the
>> availability of such a thing.
>
> I think RFC 6962 could be improved substantially with some greater adherence
> to some structure.

It would also benefit from JSON text sequences...

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email