Re: [Json] JSON & ECMA

[Larry Masinter <[e-mail]>]

I was talking about the IETF work.

I'd like it to be clear in the IETF working group charter that other standards groups working on related technology will have their requirements considered "in scope" to the IETF work.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paul Hoffman [mailto:[e-mail]]
> Sent: Monday, March 25, 2013 8:52 AM
> To: Larry Masinter
> Cc: [e-mail]
> Subject: Re: [Json] JSON & ECMA
> 
> On Mar 24, 2013, at 1:56 PM, Larry Masinter <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> > How about "The working group should work to ensure that the JSON
> specification produced will be suitable for being the normative definition of
> JSON referenced from specifications from other standards groups, including
> W3C and ECMA TC39."
> 
> How is that an actionable statement for the charter?

It would mean that requirements from other standards groups would
explicitly be "in scope" for the IETF work. For example, perhaps ECMAScript 6
could avoid repeating the grammar if only the IETF spec contained a 
named non-terminal to cover the case of not allowing duplicate names.


> What could this WG do that would *not* make the specification we produce
> "be suitable for being the normative definition of JSON referenced from
> specifications from other standards groups, including W3C and ECMA TC39"?

Not acknowledge or give any priority to the requirements of those
wanting to make normative reference.
 
> > That doesn't require any direct coordination, but makes it clear that the
> intent is that other specs normatively reference this one.
> 
> I think us putting in the charter things that put pressure on other SDOs is not
> terribly productive for anyone. Maybe let's keep the charter about the IETF
> work.

The intent isn't to put pressure on other SDOs. It is to put pressure on
IETF participants to make best effort to accommodate other SDOs.


> --Paul Hoffman