Re: [Json] Call for Consensus: Proposed Text for "8.1 Character Encoding"

[Peter Cordell <[e-mail]>]

On 20/03/2017 16:46, Julian Reschke wrote:
> On 2017-03-20 17:26, Matthew A. Miller wrote:
>> encoded in UTF-8 are interoperable in the sense that they will be
>> read successfully by the maximum number of implementations; there are
>> many implementations that cannot successfully read texts in other
>> encodings (such as UTF-16 and UTF-32).  Text encoded in character
>
> Replace "in other encodings (such as UTF-16 and UTF-32)" by just "in
> other encodings". The proposed text implies that there encodings other
> than UTF-16 or UTF-32 which could be allowed.

If that's what you want, instead of:

     there are many implementations that cannot successfully read
     texts in other encodings (such as UTF-16 and UTF-32).

Or:

     there are many implementations that cannot successfully read
     texts in other encodings.

I think it would be even clearer to say:

     there are many implementations that cannot successfully read
     texts encoded in UTF-16 or UTF-32.

Regards,

Pete Cordell
Codalogic Ltd
Rules for Describing JSON Content, http://json-content-rules.org