Re: [Json] Proposal to move forward on acceptable roots

OK, I’ve got a i-json-01 in progress at
http://www.tbray.org/tmp/draft-ietf-json-i-json-01.html which I think
captures all the consensus calls and also includes a “Protocol-design
Recommendations” section and drops the array-or-object top-level constraint.

Diffs at
http://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url1=http://www.tbray.org/tmp/draft-ietf-json-i-json-00.txt&url2=http://www.tbray.org/tmp/draft-ietf-json-i-json-01.txt

On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 2:18 PM, Matthew Morley <matt@mpcm.com> wrote:

> +1
>
>
> On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 12:13 PM, Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr) <
> jhildebr@cisco.com> wrote:
>
>> One way we could go on the topic of what goes in the root that would work
>> for me would be for us to add a non-normative section to I-JSON giving
>> protocol design advice, and move the issue of potential incompatibility of
>> non-[object,array] roots to that section.
>>
>> Into that section, we can also put some suggestions about how to encode
>> integers, floats, and dates in strings, how to do forward-compatibility
>> with objects (MUST ignore what you don't understand), and whatever other
>> pearls of wisdom we come up with.
>>
>> Yes, I know that will make the document take longer, and open up other
>> areas for us to argue about.
>>
>> --
>> Joe Hildebrand
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> json mailing list
>> json@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/json
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Matthew P. C. Morley
>
> _______________________________________________
> json mailing list
> json@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/json
>
>

-- 
- Tim Bray (If you’d like to send me a private message, see
https://keybase.io/timbray)